Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
HomeAnnouncementsFree MagazinesWhite PapersSubmit Content
Discussion GroupsASP.NETWindows FormsLanguages.NET FrameworkVisual Studio.NET
Articles.NET FrameworkASP.NETToolsWindows Forms
.NET DirectoryOpen Source ProjectsUser GroupsWeb Resources
Related Topics
Visual Basic 6SQL ServerMS AccessOther DB ProductsMS Server ProductsMore Topics ...

.NET Forum / ASP.NET / Web Services / September 2006

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

Webservice method names standards ?

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
CharlesG - 12 Sep 2006 10:37 GMT
Hi all,

Can you let me know if there is a standard naming convention for
webservice methods ? I have seen some with a lower case first letter
and some with an upper case first letter. Also what is the standard
naming convention for the properties of classes passed into the
methods?
We have to implement web services in .NET and Java and they need to use
exactly the same naming convention for the exposed methods.

Thanks for the help,
         Charles Gamble.
John Saunders - 12 Sep 2006 11:47 GMT
> Hi all,
>
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
> We have to implement web services in .NET and Java and they need to use
> exactly the same naming convention for the exposed methods.

There is no Web Services naming standard for methods. In part, this is
because web services don't have methods - they have operations.

The Java and .NET naming conventions conflict. Pick one.

John
CharlesG - 13 Sep 2006 14:07 GMT
Hi,

Thanks for the info John. However, I would like to base the decision on
some kind of reasoning, which convention is most popular ?

Thanks,
   Charles.

> > Hi all,
> >
[quoted text clipped - 12 lines]
>
> John
John Saunders - 13 Sep 2006 14:57 GMT
> Hi,
>
> Thanks for the info John. However, I would like to base the decision on
> some kind of reasoning, which convention is most popular ?

Why do you assume that reasoning is involved in what is, essentially, an
matter of taste?

The only practical reasons I've ever heard are shared by the two platforms.
They both use camel case so that word breaks are clearly visible, at a
glance. thisIsAMethod is more readable than this_is_a_method. However,

ThisIsAMethod and
thisIsAMethod

are pretty much the same.

I think there may be some reasoning around "capitalize the important
things". In that sense, I, personally would vote for method names being
important enough to capitalize. The Java camp thinks that class names are
important enough to capitalize, but not method names. This may be because
Java doesn't use properties, as C# does, so they may be capitalizing method
names at the same level as attribute names (which start with lower case).
That makes a sort of sense.

Being "in the .NET camp", I get to use properties, for which I use a leading
capital letter, the same as I do for methods. This leads me to use leading
capitals on my method names.

Of course, it would be simpler to simply document your reasoning by saying
that "John Saunders said so"... ;-)

John

P.S. I was using IBM Rational Application Developer as a tool to prove that
my WSDL can be consumed by Java. I noticed that it actually warns you
against using leading capital letters in method names. You actually get a
little yellow warning icon saying "that method name is not recommended".
RYoung - 21 Sep 2006 19:00 GMT
"John Saunders" <john.saunders at trizetto.com> wrote in message >

> P.S. I was using IBM Rational Application Developer as a tool to prove
> that my WSDL can be consumed by Java. I noticed that it actually warns you
> against using leading capital letters in method names. You actually get a
> little yellow warning icon saying "that method name is not recommended".

That's a pretty goofy warning. I was curious about what interesting things
you may have encountered that made it necessary to prove your WSDL can be
consumed by Java. Have you documented anything about that on the web?

Ron
John Saunders - 21 Sep 2006 21:37 GMT
> "John Saunders" <john.saunders at trizetto.com> wrote in message >
>
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
> you may have encountered that made it necessary to prove your WSDL can be
> consumed by Java. Have you documented anything about that on the web?

I don't have a document, but IBM does:

Web Services support for Schema/WSDL(s) containing optional JAX-RPC 1.0/1.1
XML Schema Types at
(http://www-1.ibm.com/support/docview.wss?uid=swg21207642).

They seem to feel the fact that this is a JAX-RPC issue absolves them from
the responsibility for fixing the bug.

John

P.S. I don't want to leave the impression that Java is bad with web
services. There are some things that the IBM stuff did well. For instance,
it translates SOAP faults in the WSDL into actual exceptions. .NET won't
even include them in a generated WSDL for you.

It was also good to see what code got generated in Java vs. C#. I wouldn't
_want_ my clients to have to jump through hoops in order to use my web
service, just because they happened to choose Java for development.

Free Magazines

Get these publications absolutely FREE for up to 12 months. There are no hidden fees and no obligation. Simply choose a title, complete the application form and submit it. Read more ...

Oracle MagazineNetwork ComputingComputer WorldBio-IT WorldeWeekInformation WeekInfosecurity
 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2008 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.