RE: [wsbpel] Issue 199: Message Variable Naming Scheme

["Satish Thatte" <satisht@microsoft.com>]

I think “.” is perfect.

 

---

From: Alex Yiu [mailto:alex.yiu@oracle.com]
Sent: Wednesday, March 16, 2005 7:54 AM
To: Yuzo Fujishima
Cc: wsbpel@lists.oasis-open.org; Satish Thatte; Yaron Y. Goland; Alex Yiu
Subject: Re: [wsbpel] Issue 199: Message Variable Naming Scheme

 

Hi Yuzo and others,

Just want to supplement info that there is a well-defined character sets that we can use within a NCNAME.

http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-xml-names/#NT-NCName

It looks like "." may be a good choice.


Regards,
Alex Yiu

 

---

Issue 199: Message Variable Naming Scheme

Status: received
Date added: 16 Mar 2005
Categories: Data handling
Date submitted: 16 March 2005
Submitter: Yuzo Fujishima
Champion: Yuzo Fujishima <fujishima@bc.jp.nec.com>
Document: Issue 103 resolution
Description: Since Issue 103 has been resolved without defining concrete naming scheme for message variables, we need a new issue to discuss it.

The BPEL issues list lists three candiates:

A. $variable.part B. $variable_part C. $variable-part

Submitter's proposal: I think candidate C is not viable because "-" will be interpreted as the minus operator.

Choose candiate A and make it illegal to have "." in variable names.
Changes: 16 Mar 2005 - new issue