Re: Naming EDVs for all (Was: Re: [MINUTES] W3C Credentials CG Call - 2020-01-21 12pm ET

Bitlocker is a trademark of Microsoft
https://trademarks.justia.com/775/98/bitlocker-to-77598061.html

It's also stated on Microsoft website:
https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/legal/intellectualproperty/trademarks/en-us..aspx

On Sat, 1 Feb 2020, 12:44 pm Jim Goodell, <jgoodell2@yahoo.com> wrote:

> “Safe” can mean more than one thing, e.g. physical thing, conditional
> state.
>
> “Locker” is a more concrete and unambiguous analogy. So BitLocker,
> BitVault or DigitalLocker are good, except weak on conveying mobility. But
> perhaps physical mobility isn’t the important quality to convey anyway. It
> seems to me more about ubiquity, always available, (via internet) rather
> than the person carries it with them (like on a flash drive)
>
> Might need to check if chosen name is registered trademark
>
> Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone
> <https://overview.mail.yahoo.com/?.src=iOS>
>
> On Friday, January 31, 2020, 11:41 AM, Steven Rowat <
> steven_rowat@sunshine.net> wrote:
>
> On 2020-01-31 8:16 am, Adrian Gropper wrote:
> > IndiaStack uses Digilocker. It’s in the context of other
> > identity-linked services.
> > https://www.indiastack.org
>
> Interesting. And I think the simplest description of what is being
> stored is "bits", so perhaps:
> Bit Locker
> or
> Bit Safe
> Bit Box
>
> I'm unsure about 1 vs. two words. A single word would be nice, but
> there are at least two concepts needed, possibly three: portable safe
> data. Getting that in one word might be tricky unless it's camel case.
>   :-)
> SafeDataBox
> BitLockBox
> BitBox
> BitSafe
>
> But camel case won't fly for the general public I think, and anyway
> it's easy to forget the capital or miss it in a transcription.
>
> Steven
>
> >
> > I have tried to steer them in the direction of standards, so far
> > without much success.
> >
> > Adrian
> >
> > On Fri, Jan 31, 2020 at 11:08 AM Steven Rowat
> > <steven_rowat@sunshine.net <mailto:steven_rowat@sunshine.net>> wrote:
>
> >
> >    Hello,
> >    In the discussion of the Jan 21 CCG call, the section quoted at
> >    the end of this email shows to me that there's a general name
> >    discussion required around EDVs (Encrypted Data Vaults). "Wallet"
> >    is rejected because it has other uses. There's no consensus yet.
> >
> >    I believe this is like what happened around "Digital Identifiers",
> >    where the whole CCG list got involved, because, as Dave Longley
> >    notes at the end of the quote, the naming needs to satisfy the
> >    general public as well as developers and codewriters.
> >
> >    And I began to think up some possibilities for "safe storage" that
> >    already exist in the physical world, perhaps to get the ball
> >    rolling in such a discussion. These are:
> >
> >    Safe     [banks, homes]
> >    Safe Drop   [couriers]
> >    Safety Deposit Box    [banks]
> >    Deposit Box  [banks, post office]
> >    Lockbox   [real estate, travel]
> >    Storage    [rental lockers, computer storage]
> >    Strongbox   [rental lockers, banks, homes]
> >    Secure Sockets   [HTTPS, SSL]
> >    Trunk   [travel luggage]
> >    Suitcase   [travel luggage]
> >    Container    [shipping trade]
> >
> >    I believe both "safe" and "mobile" need to be implied, and I'm
> >    unsure whether the word "data" is best used or not. So at this
> >    point my own preferences would be combinations like:
> >    Data Lockbox
> >    Safe Box
> >    Data Safe
> >
> >    etc.
> >
> >    Other opinions?
> >
> >
> >    On 2020-01-29 8:19 pm, W3C CCG Chairs wrote:
> >      > Manu Sporny: ...We, as an organization, want
> >      >    to focus on portability, CHAPI, moving wallets, etc. simpler
> use
> >      >    cases. [scribe assist by Dave Longley]
> >      > Joe Andrieu:  I put myself on the queue - to push back on
> >      >    language around wallet vs. vault that Manu used. Naming is
> hard,
> >      >    attempting to be constructive.
> >      > Orie Steele: "Wallet" is a terrible name :( ... names are hard....
> >      > Drummond Reed: The DIF Glossary Project is drilling deep into
> >      >    community definitions of "wallet", "agent", and "credential".
> >      >    It's amazing how diverse some of the responses are.
> >      > Joe Andrieu:  ChristopherA and I wrote a topic for the last
> >      >    rebooting - spoke about how "Identity Wallets" and "Crypto
> >      >    Wallets" have similarities, trying to find similarities
> >      >    architecturally. Crypto wallets are not in your hardware
> >      >    wallet... a wallet is how you control access to your stuff, not
> >      >    the actual store that has it. A good crypto wallet could have
> >      >    Bitcoin, Ethereum, AltCoins, but the way that tech works is
> that
> >      >    the important stuff is not in the wallets.
> >      > Adrian Gropper: +1 To Joe's and Drummond's comments on "wallet"
> >      > Stephen Curran: "Wallet" in mainstream usage is the app you have
> >      >    on your phone. It's not the bit of the any "thingy" (agent,
> >      >    whatever) that stores things. Using that term is fighting a
> >      >    losing battle.
> >      > Joe Andrieu:  The interfaces that we use to get access to stores
> >      >    vs the stores themselves are important. We also need a good
> >      >    separation between those so we can move EDVs around w/o
> changing
> >      >    front-end wallet.
> >      > Dave Longley: There's probably also a naming issue here where the
> >      >    general public will understand "wallet" as all of the
> >    layers, but
> >      >    developers/technologists should understand there are more
> layers
> >
> >
> >    Steven Rowat
> >
>
>