On 13-Oct-06, at 12:04 AM, Martin Atkins wrote: > Graves, Michael wrote: >> >> >> I won't delve into where we are with respect to that capability here, >> but want to suggest that maybe as we move to OpenID 2.0, and now >> offer >> portable IDs (as well as run-time chosen IDs selected at auth- >> time?), we >> may be wise to just make the jump to using "homesite" and >> "membersite" >> across the board, rather than "IdP" and "relying party", both of >> which >> are technically problematic for our framework. >> > > I kinda get "homesite", but I don't understand the thinking behind > "membersite": What is this site supposed to be a "member" of?
It was a member of the network of sites running the protocol. > > Personally, I quite liked the old OpenID term "consumer". :) That term was confusing when talking to consumer sites.. Are you referring to the user "consumer" or the site "consumer". -- Dick _______________________________________________ specs mailing list specs@openid.net http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/specs