W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-credentials@w3.org > June 2017

Re: Terminology poll

From: David Chadwick <D.W.Chadwick@kent.ac.uk>
Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2017 00:21:54 +0100
To: public-credentials@w3.org
Message-ID: <e247e13a-56b4-5ed0-6848-5754bf12b6a4@kent.ac.uk>
or alternatively

On 27/06/2017 00:06, Joe Andrieu wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 26, 2017, at 06:59 PM, David Chadwick wrote:
>> Wouldnt this be solved by calling VCs verifiable credentials rather than
>> claims and removing the word claim from our vocabulary.
> 
> + to "Issuers create credentials" which contain verifiable claims.

issuers create credentials which contain statements that can be verified

> 
> That feeds the downstream:
> * claimants use claims by bundling them into entity profiles,

claimants may bundle together statements into entity profiles


> * then claimants claim the benefits of said claims by presenting entity
> profiles to inspectors/verifiers/relying-parties.

claimants use credentials to claim benefits from inspectors....

> 
> What is "verifiable" however is still the claim: issued by issuers,

what is verifiable is the statement made by the issuer

So you see, with a little positive will it is feasible to remove any
notion of the credential containing a claim

The Issuer is in fact making a statement, so why call it a claim?

A driving license is a not a claim, it is a credential containing
statements of fact (that you are entitled to drive)

So let us get rid of the term 'claim' as it leads to all sort of
mis-interpretations.

In the real world the documents that we want to replace with VCs are all
statements of fact made by issuers. None of them are claims.

No-one would call a membership card, passport, credit card or any such
thing a claim. So neither should we.

regards

David


> verified by inspectors/verifiers/relying-parties. 
> 
> So -1 for changing VCs to verifiable credentials.
> 
> -j
> 
> On Mon, Jun 26, 2017, at 06:59 PM, David Chadwick wrote:
>> Wouldnt this be solved by calling VCs verifiable credentials rather than
>> claims and removing the word claim from our vocabulary.
>>
>> regards
>>
>> David
>>
>> On 26/06/2017 23:33, Steven Rowat wrote:
>>
>>     On 2017-06-26 3:00 PM, David Chadwick wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>         On 26/06/2017 16:59, Dave Longley wrote:
>>
>>             A potential problem with claimant is that the entity that
>>             actually makes
>>             the claim is the issuer.
>>
>>
>>         You are misinterpreting the word 'makes' in your sentence
>>         above. In the
>>         various dictionary definitions of claimant, 'makes a claim' is
>>         used to
>>         denote 'asking for something', not 'manufacturing' or
>>         'producing' a
>>         claim, which is your semantic
>>
>>
>>
>>     I believe that in both this and your accompanying email, David,
>>     with the
>>     definitions of 'claimant' showing that this can't be the person who
>>     actually produces the claim, you are correct.
>>
>>     But I believe the problem with using 'Claimant', capital 'C', in the
>>     'Holder/Presenter...' role is that there is already, unless we change
>>     this too, a Claim, capital 'C', that **is** produced by the Issuer.
>>
>>     If we used 'Claimant', then we'd be in the position of having:
>>     Person A, the Claimant, 'makes a claim' that the Claim made by the
>>     Issuer is correct.
>>
>>     If would force us to have 'making a claim' (colloquially) apply to
>>     both
>>     roles.
>>
>>     That seems an unavoidable byproduct of having the official word
>>     'Claim'
>>     for what's being produced by the Issuer.
>>
>>     I believe this would cause unnecessary confusion and should be
>>     avoided.
>>
>>     Steven
>>
>>
>>         regards
>>
>>         David
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
> 
> --
> Joe Andrieu, PMP
> joe@joeandrieu.com <mailto:joe@joeandrieu.com>
> +1(805)705-8651
> http://blog.joeandrieu.com
> 
Received on Monday, 26 June 2017 23:22:26 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 11 July 2018 21:19:39 UTC