Re: Issue 210: component equivalence

That's already in the spec in a few places, but I don't know if we say 
it categorically about all components.

For example, isn't it possible to have two Message Reference components 
with the same names but different properties? Also, would such a 
requirement be across the context of all existent components, just 
those in a single document, a single component model, etc?


On Jun 21, 2004, at 8:34 PM, Sanjiva Weerawarana wrote:

> And we could go one step further and state that its an error
> for two components (of the same type) with the same name to be
> different. That is, assert that name equiv must imply structural
> equiv.
>
> OTOH if that were not the world would be whacky; so mebbe no
> need to say it at all.
>
> Sanjiva.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Mark Nottingham" <mark.nottingham@bea.com>
> To: "Roberto Chinnici" <Roberto.Chinnici@Sun.COM>
> Cc: <www-ws-desc@w3.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, June 22, 2004 6:13 AM
> Subject: Re: Issue 210: component equivalence
>
>
>>
>>
>> On Jun 21, 2004, at 4:58 PM, Roberto Chinnici wrote:
>>
>>> Given that different top-level components must have different names,
>>> if you process a valid WSDL document and get some components out of 
>>> it,
>>> you can decide whether two top-level components are equivalent just
>>> by comparing their {name} properties.
>>
>> Oh, OK. how about:
>>
>> --8<--
>> Note that because different top-level components (e.g., interface,
>> binding and service) are required to have different names, it's
>> possible to determine whether two of a given type are equivalent by
>> examining their {name} and {target namespace} properties.
>> -->8--
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> --
>> Mark Nottingham   Principal Technologist
>> Office of the CTO   BEA Systems
>>

--
Mark Nottingham   Principal Technologist
Office of the CTO   BEA Systems

Received on Tuesday, 22 June 2004 00:42:28 UTC