It was a "Random Thought" :) -- dims
On Tue, 15 Feb 2005 09:53:22 -0500, Glen Daniels <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > But the point is that Axis Modules are precisely the implementation of > SOAP Modules! "Block" in SOAP parlance refers to a single header > element, which is too fine a granularity for the thing we're talking > about here. A typical Module may process lots of different header > blocks, as well as affecting WSDL generation, understanding policy > assertions, etc. > > -1 to the changed terminology. > > --Glen > > P.S. Curious - why would you want to avoid the SOAP Module terminology? > > Davanum Srinivas wrote: > > I thought of trying to avoid the soap module terminology. my 2 cents, > > I think block will work for both #1 and #2. > > > > -- dims > > > > On Tue, 15 Feb 2005 09:21:36 +0600, Srinath Perera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > wrote: > > > >>1) if the module is just a packaing of the Handler for usability > >>purposes am +1 for name it blocks > >>2) I think Module is littel bit more than that, for an example I would > >>like to have ability to have Service ref a module and have it enabled > >>as the j2ee does. > >>e.g. > >><service name="foo"> > >> <module ref="Authentication"/> > >></service> > >>then the service foo has the authentication enabled. > >> > >>In the context of #2 I feel module make more sense .. thoughts? > >>Thanks > >>Srianth > >> > >>On Mon, 14 Feb 2005 21:43:09 -0500, Davanum Srinivas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >>wrote: > >> > >>>Can we call them "blocks"? (instead of modules?) > >>> > >>>-- dims > >>> > >>>-- > >>>Davanum Srinivas - http://webservices.apache.org/~dims/ > >>> > >> > > > > > -- Davanum Srinivas - http://webservices.apache.org/~dims/
