[wsf-dev] naming?

[Pulkit Singhal]

I agree with Scott about:
====
WSF is too unknown to developers to call it "Possum" and just say "yeah,
that's the WSF library"
====

But just for kicks, in case it ends up flying, I'd like nominate the name:
"Behemoth". Yes I understand the connotation about being large and
overbearing but I just couldn't keep quiet after reading the discussion ...
its been floating around in my head since I started working with web
services. Just a pet-peeve feel free to ignore.

Cheers!

On Tue, Feb 26, 2008 at 10:44 AM, Scott Cantor <cantor.2 at osu.edu> wrote:

> > OpenLiberty-J   sounds good, I also like the uppercase "O"  -- makes
> > it look stronger.
>
> That one happened while I wasn't looking, and I tend to interchange them
> because I like OpenLiberty more than openLiberty.
>
> > 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.
>
> Which is why I don't make the distinction. Another example...Axis doesn't
> come in a SOAP client and server version. It's just different parts of the
> package.
>
> > The only problem is that openLiberty covers more than ID-WSF at then
> > moment.
>
> My scope of ID-WSF is everything Liberty does that's not SAML. Admittedly
> overly broad. My point is kind of that even if other non-WSF stuff is in
> the
> pot, who cares?
>
> > 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
>
> Just a personal opinion, but I would have turned it around and put the XML
> classes inside the disco package.
>
> > 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.
>
> Yes, that's a different issue.
>
> > 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.
>
> Well, it's not super catchy, but it's better than something with WSF in
> it.
> You're not talking to somebody in marketing. To me Shibboleth is "catchy"
> and I've been told it sucks, so...(in fairness I didn't come up with that
> name either).
>
> > Since ID-* is shorthand for ID-WSF, ID-SIS, ID-FF:
>
> ID-FF is superseded, and I lump all the rest into ID-WSF, as I said.
>
> > idSTAR-J
>
> I think I would avoid anything like STAR.
>
> > OpenLID-J
>
> There was an OpenID competitor called LID, best to avoid that.
>
> The basic problem is that there's no catchy name for ID-WSF. Unless you
> just
> make up a name that's unrelated, it just doesn't lend itself to anything.
> And speaking frankly, WSF is too unknown to developers to call it "Possum"
> and just say "yeah, that's the WSF library". Liberty at least has a known
> name.
>
> -- Scott
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wsf-dev mailing list
> Wsf-dev at lists.openliberty.org
>
> http://lists.openliberty.org/mailman/listinfo/wsf-dev_lists.openliberty.org
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.openliberty.org/pipermail/wsf-dev_lists.openliberty.org/attachments/20080226/cbf51609/attachment.html