Syntax, Personality, oh my!

Okay--

So there's definitely some confusion (even between my own 2 ears)
about what a syntax is, and what a personality is.  And then we
also have semantic modules, and soon there will be extra 'things'
represented as tags also.  And it's all just a mess, conceptually.

One one level, we have the major specifications:

    BPEL4WS
    BPML
    WSCI

On another level, we have things that can plug into each/any syntax
as actions, as each spec allows the actions to be extended using
XML namespaces:

    Actions as Java classes
    Actions as in-line BeanShell
    Actions as in-line Python script
    Actions as in-line jelly script

Of course, BPEL4WS, BPML and the specs come with a concept of an
action that's restricted to invoking/receiving web-service calls.

And then, I think we'll be having other actions that aren't business
actions, like <log> maybe.

Right now, we have 'personality' floating around that tends to 
encompass the scope of BPEL4WS, or BPML, or my own Basic personality.
This implies a syntax and everything else that goes with the spec.
Sorta.

Internally, we also have a syntax for defining personalities;
a meta-syntax, if you will.

So, I'm thinking, first of all, of calling the things currently
called 'semantic modules' simply 'libraries' as they are really
just libraries of actions, message-selectors and correlators,
and not really semantic modules in the drools sense.

Then, I think instead of 'personality', let's call that 'syntax'.

And what is currently 'syntax' would become the 'metasyntax'
that is used to define syntaxes.

Ah, the joys of naming.

Any thoughts?

	-bob