Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
- BUT, given that it's a big change and likely invalidates a lot of dead
tree material, I'd suggest we just stick with principal and be done with
it ;-)
If that last point were the doctrine by which previous refactorings had
to be undertaken (e.g. the
Chris Withers wrote:
Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
- BUT, given that it's a big change and likely invalidates a lot of dead
tree material, I'd suggest we just stick with principal and be done with
it ;-)
If that last point were the doctrine by which previous refactorings had
to be
Steve Alexander wrote:
I think so too. But I whould not try to explain a PAU (pluggable
authentication utility) without to use the word principal. I think
using the words user or participant for a principal in this case is
not a good idea.
Perhaps the scope of the PUA can be extended to have
If not that, we can at least make the weaker case that no Zope 3 *UI*
user (whether it's the ZMI or something built on top of it) ordinarily
should have to know about 'principals'.
I agree with that.
--
Steve Alexander
___
Zope3-dev mailing list
Note that such user objects (or group objects) in applications are
frequently content objects and are accessible through content space. I
think in Zope 2 terms this entity may be called 'member'...
In Launchpad, we have a Person table in the database. Data from there
are converted into
Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
Martijn suggests to just use user. I can live with that. The reason
why I didn't propose that is because I thought people still valued the
abstraction of a principal as opposed to the physical person. I don't
need it and all those Unix users out there don't seem
Roger Ineichen wrote:
Hi principals
*shrug* I'm a user :).
Since principal doesn't seem to be a common term in IT speak either,
translators repeatedly have their problems with it. In German, for
example, we came up with Nutzungsberechtigter which is just an
arbitrary choice and doesn't even fit
On 9/13/05, Philipp von Weitershausen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Perhaps it is helpful to describe what a principal really are.
A principal object represents the security context of the user on whose
behalf the code is running, including the user's identity, groups and
roles to which
Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
Martijn suggests to just use user. I can live with that. The reason
why I didn't propose that is because I thought people still valued the
abstraction of a principal as opposed to the physical person. I don't
need it and all those Unix users out there don't
; 'Stephan Richter'
Subject: Re: [Zope3-dev] RFC: Rename principal to participant
[...]
Perhaps it is helpful to describe what a principal really are.
A principal object represents the security context of the
user on whose
behalf the code is running, including the user's identity
Steve Alexander wrote:
In Launchpad, request.principal is not used by the application
programmers. It is used only by the authentication, authorization and
publication machinery. The machinery looks up a Person (an application
domain object) for the current principal (the participant, if you
On 9/13/05, Shane Hathaway [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It sounds like you're saying only the security machinery should know
about principals, and that everything else deals with users. If so, it
should not be necessary for any Zope 3 developer to learn about
principals unless they are writing
Shane Hathaway wrote:
Steve Alexander wrote:
In Launchpad, request.principal is not used by the application
programmers. It is used only by the authentication, authorization and
publication machinery. The machinery looks up a Person (an application
domain object) for the current principal
Hi Shane
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Shane Hathaway
Sent: Tuesday, September 13, 2005 7:34 PM
To: Steve Alexander
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [Zope3-dev] RFC: Rename principal to participant
Steve Alexander wrote
I think so too. But I whould not try to explain a PAU (pluggable
authentication utility) without to use the word principal. I think
using the words user or participant for a principal in this case is
not a good idea.
Perhaps the scope of the PUA can be extended to have a plug-in factory
for
Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
(Note that the point of finding translations for technical terms is not
only for the sake of a translated Zope 3 UI. It's more about how people
understand technical terms. I think most Zope 3 developers aren't native
English speakers and they do not necessarily
It seems the word Principal is ubiquitous in security-related
software: see
Microsoft dot Net Principal [1]
java.security.Principal
Kerberos [2]
GSS API
[1]
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/cpref/html/frlrfsystemsecurityprincipal.asp
[2]
On Monday 12 September 2005 12:31, Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
So, I would like to give principal a better name. How about
participant? After all, a principal _participates_ in an interaction
through a participation (e.g. an HTTP request). Participant should also
be pretty easy to
Stephan Richter wrote:
On Monday 12 September 2005 12:31, Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
So, I would like to give principal a better name. How about
participant? After all, a principal _participates_ in an interaction
through a participation (e.g. an HTTP request). Participant should also
be
Marc Rijken wrote:
Stephan Richter wrote:
On Monday 12 September 2005 12:31, Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
So, I would like to give principal a better name. How about
participant? After all, a principal _participates_ in an interaction
through a participation (e.g. an HTTP request).
Craeg Strong wrote:
It seems the word Principal is ubiquitous in security-related
software: see
Microsoft dot Net Principal [1]
java.security.Principal
Kerberos [2]
GSS API
[1]
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/cpref/html/frlrfsystemsecurityprincipal.asp
I just wonder how well-established principal really is (yeah, I know, J2EE
and .NET
are pretty big establishments).
Actually they borrowed the word from security systems that predate them
such as Kerberos.
I think Kerberos again borrowed the term from security software dating
back from
Hi principals
Behalf Of Philipp von Weitershausen
Sent: Monday, September 12, 2005 6:32 PM
To: zope3-dev@zope.org
Subject: [Zope3-dev] RFC: Rename principal to participant
Hi there,
[...]
Since principal doesn't seem to be a common term in IT speak either,
translators repeatedly have
23 matches
Mail list logo
