[wsf-dev] naming?

[Asa Hardcastle]

I see where Conor is coming from and where Scott is coming from.

OpenLiberty-J   sounds good, I also like the uppercase "O"  -- makes  
it look stronger.   The differentiation between wsc and wsp is  
important, however, as we have discussed many times before, the lines  
are very blurry.  The tooling that we have done for WSC would be re- 
useable for a WSP.

The only problem is that openLiberty covers more than ID-WSF at then  
moment.   Maybe that should change.   OpenLiberty could still be the  
location of the work until the projects are under the apache  
foundation (kind of like the apache foundation itself -- apache is a  
webserver and a foundation)

 > OpenLiberty-J would be the java implementations of the ID-WSF  
specifications

The package structure would determine the use (as it does now):

org.openliberty.wsc
  --  where the wsc code currently exists

org.openliberty.xmltooling
  -- where the base package for all of the java objects that represent  
the xml elements of the spec currently exist, eg,  
org.openliberty.xmltooling.disco

org.openliberty.wsp
  -- base packagewhere WSP code might be


On the level of documentation, creating clear segregation between  
client and server is critical.  I imagine this would be done with use  
case sample code.

Ideally we could get identity into the name in some way, and web  
services for that matter.  And it should be catchy.  OpenLiberty-J is  
catchy.

Since ID-* is shorthand for ID-WSF, ID-SIS, ID-FF:

idSTAR-J

IDStar-J

OpenLID-J

OpenLIDStar-J

LibertyStar-J

OpenLID*-J



later,

asa


On Feb 26, 2008, at 11:46 AM, Scott Cantor wrote:

>> I think it is worthwhile differentiating between a client and a  
>> server
>> implementation when we talk about the stuff.  So perhaps
> OpenLiberty-J-Client or
>> something that indicates it's the client side of Liberty in Java.
>
> And we rejected that because to most people client means something  
> they run
> on their desktop.
>
> So I've said my peace (again)...I think it should be one name, and  
> don't
> agree with splitting client and server.
>
> -- Scott
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wsf-dev mailing list
> Wsf-dev at lists.openliberty.org
> http://lists.openliberty.org/mailman/listinfo/wsf-dev_lists.openliberty.org

--
Asa Hardcastle, Technical Lead, openLiberty ID-WSF ClientLib
Tel: +1.413.429.1044 Skype: subsystem7