- From: Jonathan Marsh <jmarsh@microsoft.com>
- Date: Wed, 23 Jun 2004 15:51:24 -0700
- To: "David Orchard" <dorchard@bea.com>, "Web Services Description" <www-ws-desc@w3.org>
Sometimes that gets awkward too: "the component properties of the Property component..." > -----Original Message----- > From: David Orchard [mailto:dorchard@bea.com] > Sent: Wednesday, June 23, 2004 3:45 PM > To: Jonathan Marsh; Web Services Description > Subject: RE: Issue 214: Refine "properties" terminology > > What about qualifying them, as in :component property and feature > property? > > Dave > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: www-ws-desc-request@w3.org [mailto:www-ws-desc-request@w3.org]On > > Behalf Of Jonathan Marsh > > Sent: Wednesday, June 23, 2004 2:49 PM > > To: Web Services Description > > Subject: Issue 214: Refine "properties" terminology > > > > > > > > Mark is absolutely right [1] that we use the term "property" way too > > much. Especially in [2] where one can use the terms ambiguously - we > > could talk about the properties of the Property component, > > which include > > the property {value} whose value is the value of the property (sound > > circular?) > > > > However, using the term "property" for the fields of the component is > > consistent with Schema and the infoset. The term "property" > > for the F&P > > property is consistent with SOAP. The clash in those two sources of > > terms is what's causing the confusion. If we change one to something > > else (like "attribute") we are likely to lose the correspondence with > > either SOAP or Schema, or our own syntax, and risk clashing with some > > other spec such as XML. > > > > We are saved to an extent in that except for the Property component, > > there isn't much proximity between the use of the two terms. I can't > > actually find a specific place in the spec where the meaning is > > ambiguous though, and if we can't identify a specific > > problem, fiddling > > around will likely just make matters worse. So I sadly > > suggest we close > > this issue with no action. > > > > [1] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/2/06/issues.html#x214 > > [2] > > http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/ws/desc/wsdl20/wsdl20 > > .html#Prop > > erty > > > >
Received on Wednesday, 23 June 2004 18:51:41 UTC