xml-soap-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Steven J. McDowall" <sjmcdow...@uswest.net>
Subject RE: what do we call this beast?
Date Mon, 07 Aug 2000 11:44:16 GMT

I think the below is perfect Sanjiva..

I assume the CVS module is still xml-soap, which I DO like because it
makes it easy to figure out WHAT soap I may be playing with.. :-)


-----Original Message-----
From: Sanjiva Weerawarana [mailto:sanjiva@watson.ibm.com]
Sent: Sunday, August 06, 2000 9:41 PM
To: soap-dev@xml.apache.org
Subject: Re: what do we call this beast?

Christopher Elkins writes:
> Here's my $.02 as nothing more than a lurker on this list: Because SOAP is
> protocol, (re-)naming the project 'Apache-SOAP' seems a little redundant -
> "Apache-SOAP is Apache's implementation of SOAP." Sure, it's
> but not all that interesting. It also nominally limits the project's
> advance in other, non-SOAP directions (e.g., alternative SOAP-like
> (However, I'd wager that the project's charter is more limiting in this
> than the project's name.)

I kind of agree with this logic - when the W3C working group gets going
(like next month) apparently the name will be something like "XML
Protocol" and not SOAP. Then, this project will become the implementation
of that protocol .. so at some point we need to find a name that works
irrespective of current "brand" names (like SOAP, SDL/SCL/SIDL/NASSL, etc.).

For now, I suggest we name the zip/gz/rpm files the following way:
etc. and that this expand to a directory called
and that the jar file in the lib dir still be called soap.jar (as now).

What do you think?


View raw message