Details
-
Improvement
-
Status: Closed
-
Major
-
Resolution: Fixed
-
None
-
None
-
None
-
None
-
n/a
Description
+1
IMHO it is better to use HTTP instead of http and SSL for ssl.
Thanks,
Samisa...
On 06 Jan 2005 16:53:43 +0600, Roshan Weerasuriya <roshan@opensource.lk> wrote:
> hi Fred,
>
> +1
>
> Roshan
> On Thu, 2005-01-06 at 16:47, Fred Preston wrote:
> >
> >
> > Hi All,
> > Looking into the future, are we happy with the naming conventions we
> > currently have to identify the components within axiscpp.conf? I was
> > thinking specifically about what happens if we develop another transport?
> > The name for the http transport is 'Transport_http' (which is probably
> > fine), but the name for an http implemented ssl channel is 'Channel_ssl'
> > and I want to define a non-secure http channel dll, i.e. 'Channel'. Now we
> > may want to reuse these names for different transports, therefore what I'm
> > suggesting is that we make a more transport specific distinction for the
> > channel implementations. Thus:-
> >
> > 'Channel_ssl' becomes 'Channel_http_ssl' and
> > 'Channel' becomes 'Channel_http'.
> >
> > Any thoughts?
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Fred Preston.