[johnk said]
> The problem is that the term 'consumer' is quite accurate and  
> descriptive when you imagine that a software application, in the role  
> of a consumer, is consuming the output of the "service provider". An  
> 'application' is certainly an OAuth system entity, but the application  
> might play multiple roles, one of which is as a consumer.


I disagree, John.

Colloquially, a "consumer" is a member of the general public, a residential 
customer, a person -- a closer match to what OAuth calls a "User".

In computing a Consumer is invariably paired with a Producer. There is usually 
an event stream from the Producer to the Consumer. OAuth does not use 
"Producer" (using Service Provider instead), and there is no event stream, so I 
think it should avoid "Consumer".

Consider an application that posts tweets to twitter on my behalf, or adds 
appointments to my online calendar, or periodically loads images from a web cam 
into flickr. Such apps can hardly be called consumers (without causing 
confusion). Such apps are producing the content that the service consumes.


Eran's suggestion of "Service", "Client", and "User-Agent" sounds likes it 
might work well to clarify the text.

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"OAuth" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/oauth?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to