- From: John Tibbetts <jtibbetts@imsglobal.org>
- Date: Mon, 15 Feb 2016 08:14:43 -0800
- To: Dave Longley <dlongley@digitalbazaar.com>
- Cc: Shane McCarron <shane@halindrome.com>, Adrian Hope-Bailie <adrian@hopebailie.com>, Steven Rowat <steven_rowat@sunshine.net>, W3C Credentials Community Group <public-credentials@w3.org>
Hi all, I’ve sent an email to a friend who’s a registrar in a large eastern university and active in the national association of registrars. I’ve asked her if there’s a term-of-art for the role of credential petitioner. I think there’s a good chance she’s not in today but I’ll forward her response to the list. Of course now that I type the sentence ‘credential petitioner’ doesn’t sound too bad. I also think ‘inspector’ might be a possibility. But of course if there’s an existing term out there we should give that additional weight. John Tibbetts Chief Product Architect IMS Global Consortium > On Feb 15, 2016, at 6:54 AM, Dave Longley <dlongley@digitalbazaar.com> wrote: > > On 02/15/2016 08:51 AM, Shane McCarron wrote: >> Hmm. But a "consumer" might not be the one doing the verification. A >> consumer is the one that needs the claim to be true (presumably). > > That's my concern as well. We could do something new with the entire > terminology like "issuing party", "holding party", > "storage/aggregator/curator/agent party", "interested party", where > "interested party" takes over for "consumer". > > The "consumer" is the party that needs trust in the credential holder in > order for it to do something. They are a "relying party", an "interested > party", and sometimes a "service provider" (but not always). They are > the party that wants to know (and be able to trust) something about > another entity (for some reason). I don't know if any of that helps > anyone think of a better name. > >> Requestor is more accurate in the case where we are talking about the >> entity that is asking the holder for the claim. > > Unfortunately, "requestor" or "recipient" can be confused with the > "holder" because the holder must request a credential be issued to them > from the issuer. > >> >> On Mon, Feb 15, 2016 at 2:20 AM, Adrian Hope-Bailie >> <adrian@hopebailie.com <mailto:adrian@hopebailie.com>> wrote: >> >> Verifier seems appropriate given that these are "verifiable" claims >> >> On 15 February 2016 at 00:59, Steven Rowat >> <steven_rowat@sunshine.net <mailto:steven_rowat@sunshine.net>> wrote: >> >> On 2/14/16 1:44 PM, Manu Sporny wrote: >> >> I'm happy with 'evaluators', but wonder what our colleagues >> in the >> education industry think? ...[snip] >> >> Credential/Claim Requestor and Credential/Claim Verifier >> could also work? >> >> >> IMO any of Requestor, Verifier, or Evaluator would be preferable >> to Consumer. >> >> Except, Requestor could be confused with 'holder', the >> person/entity asking for the original issuing, since at the >> start they are 'requesting' that a credential be issued for them >> -- which they then take elsewhere to be Evaluated or Verified >> (or, currently, Consumed). >> >> But as you noted, with multiple possible systems in play -- >> finance, education, payments, government -- it's going to be >> hard not to cause at least some confusion somewhere. >> >> >> Steven >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> -Shane > > > -- > Dave Longley > CTO > Digital Bazaar, Inc. >
Received on Monday, 15 February 2016 16:15:14 UTC