Re: Changing Terminology (was RE: IdP term in spec (was RE: Delegation discussion summary))

2006-10-17 Thread Dick Hardt
I think we should be open (pun intended) to making changes.

I really like the OpenID Provider - shortens to OP, and is very  
specific on what it does.
I have always found IdP to be a misnomer, and have mentioned it in  
the past.
Now we have a great candidate, that provides more clarity, and it  
should be a simple search and replace, and does not affect any code.

Agreed the user friendly terms may take some more discussion.

-- Dick

On 15-Oct-06, at 11:58 AM, Recordon, David wrote:

 I'd really prefer not to change terminology in the spec right now.
 Seems like something we should have thought about four months ago  
 versus
 a week after we said it would be final.  There is nothing saying user
 friendly terms that map to spec terms can't be created for the time
 being.  I do however think there will need to be healthy discussion
 around them, that takes longer than a week.  :)

 --David

 -Original Message-
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
 Behalf Of Drummond Reed
 Sent: Saturday, October 14, 2006 11:43 PM
 To: 'Johannes Ernst'; specs@openid.net
 Subject: IdP term in spec (was RE: Delegation discussion summary)

 Suggestion: sidestep the issue completely and in the spec -- and
 everywhere else -- just call it OpenID provider. It's a simple
 concatenation of OpenID and service provider, so everyone gets it,
 but nobody will associate it with SAML or federation or anything else.

 -Original Message-
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
 Behalf Of Johannes Ernst
 Sent: Saturday, October 14, 2006 11:37 PM
 To: specs@openid.net
 Subject: Re: Delegation discussion summary

 We call it identity host at NetMesh. It's close enough to identity
 provider so people understand it quickly, but does not have the
 provider part to it (duh).

 On Oct 14, 2006, at 20:46, Scott Kveton wrote:

 I would propose that the term Homesite be used when prompting the
 user to type in their IdP. I think the term Identity Provider is
 overloaded and not user friendly.

 As per my last email I feel the same way about identity provider
 as well
 ... I agree with Dick; too overloaded and not user friendly.

 ___
 specs mailing list
 specs@openid.net
 http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/specs

 Johannes Ernst
 NetMesh Inc.


 ___
 specs mailing list
 specs@openid.net
 http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/specs

 ___
 specs mailing list
 specs@openid.net
 http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/specs



___
specs mailing list
specs@openid.net
http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/specs


IdP term in spec (was RE: Delegation discussion summary)

2006-10-15 Thread Drummond Reed
Suggestion: sidestep the issue completely and in the spec -- and everywhere
else -- just call it OpenID provider. It's a simple concatenation of
OpenID and service provider, so everyone gets it, but nobody will
associate it with SAML or federation or anything else.

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
Of Johannes Ernst
Sent: Saturday, October 14, 2006 11:37 PM
To: specs@openid.net
Subject: Re: Delegation discussion summary

We call it identity host at NetMesh. It's close enough to identity  
provider so people understand it quickly, but does not have the  
provider part to it (duh).

On Oct 14, 2006, at 20:46, Scott Kveton wrote:

 I would propose that the term Homesite be used when prompting the
 user to type in their IdP. I think the term Identity Provider is
 overloaded and not user friendly.

 As per my last email I feel the same way about identity provider  
 as well
 ... I agree with Dick; too overloaded and not user friendly.

 ___
 specs mailing list
 specs@openid.net
 http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/specs

Johannes Ernst
NetMesh Inc.


___
specs mailing list
specs@openid.net
http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/specs