W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-credentials@w3.org > March 2016

Re: Alternative terminology for "consumer"

From: Stuart Sutton <sasutton@dublincore.net>
Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2016 06:01:24 -0700
Message-ID: <CAK74qRvRrJKNXWeR4=WWiQn8a1ca1szYb_VWr+NAZ4PpvcO_3g@mail.gmail.com>
To: Jim Goodell <jgoodell2@yahoo.com>
Cc: "Stone, Matt" <matt.stone@pearson.com>, Steven Rowat <steven_rowat@sunshine.net>, "public-credentials@w3.org" <public-credentials@w3.org>
I agree with Jim. You can search forever and not find the perfect fit in
terms of 'label'. A good definition should provide meaning and scope. Of
course, there are folks who never read definitions and apply their
parochial understanding to a label and are thus destined to get it wrong.
It is nevertheless a question of more or less adequate as opposed to the
elusive perfect.

On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 5:36 AM, Jim Goodell <jgoodell2@yahoo.com> wrote:

> It is difficult (sometimes impossible) to find a label that works for
> everyone and every use, in this case for an actor with multiple roles
> (needs credential, earns credential, receives credential, uses credential
> for x, y, and z). Better to find a label for the actor that works "well
> enough" (with no strong objections); then clearly define, in the context of
> verifiable claims, all that label means about a person's role in the
> ecosystem. A two or three sentence definition can remove ambiguity of a
> single word label.
> -Jim
> On Wednesday, March 30, 2016, 1:25 AM, Stone, Matt <matt.stone@pearson.com>
> wrote:
> Since our fundamental topic is a "verifiable claim", maybe
> "verifier" fits.
> I'm afraid we're overthinking the nuance and subtext to the point that no
> one  will get it when we eventually roll it out.  I respect that language
> has power but also know than few others will think as deeply as we do on
> the topic.  If it's overworked, we'll spend the next 5yrs saying things
> like "Think about it like this..."
> -stone
> On Tuesday, March 29, 2016, Steven Rowat <steven_rowat@sunshine.net>
> wrote:
>> On 3/29/16 9:42 PM, Dave Longley wrote:
>>> So, I believe we need a term that indicates that someone is in need of
>>> something (ie: a credential) in order to proceed with some action.
>> demander
>> requirer
>> needer
>> necessitator
>> requisitioner
>> caller
>> S.
> --
> =====
> Matt Stone
> 501-291-1599
Received on Wednesday, 30 March 2016 13:01:54 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 30 March 2016 13:01:54 UTC