Re: [xacml] Profile naming

Hi,

I prefer Ray's proposal since it keeps the version number reference unambiguous. However, Chet said that a comma is not allowed, so it becomes "XACML SAML Profile Version 2.0". That is clear and concise to me.

I reviewed the work product naming conventions.

http://docs.oasis-open.org/specGuidelines/ndr/namingDirectives.html#WorkProduct-Title

I cannot find anything which forbids using acronyms in the title, though they say that the acronym must be written in parentheses and follow the full wording. However, we don't use the full expansion of the acronym in this case. I don't think we should because it leads to a very long and unwieldy title.

I suppose we should also change the document identifier. It is currently xacml-profile-saml2.0-v2.0-wd18. To align it with the title, we should rename it to xacml-saml-profile-v2.0-wd18

I'm not sure what the implications of changing the document identifier could be, so I can check with Chet so we don't create a rift in the space time continuum, or worse. But I'll do that after we have agreed on our favorite name.

Best regards,
Erik

On 2014-05-16 09:43, David Brossard wrote:

Hi Ray,

I tend to think that the 3 profiles that use the form xxx profile of XACML are easier to pronounce. I'd rather stick to that naming.

Cheers,

David.

On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 9:18 AM, Sinnema, Remon <remon.sinnema@emc.com> wrote:

All,

This is a follow-up from the last meeting, where we discussed the naming of the SAML profile.

Looking at the current list of profiles, I see that most profile names start with XACML:

·         XACML Hierarchical Resource Profile

·         XACML Digital Signatures Profile

·         XACML EC-US Profile

·         XACML IPC Profile

·         XACML MAP Authorization Profile

·         XACML Additional Combining Algorithms Profile

·         XACML DLP/NAC Profile

·         XACML Related and Nested Entities Profile

·         XACML Obligation and Advice Authority Profile

·         XACML Obligation Profile for Healthcare

·         XACML PDP Metadata (without the word “Profile”)

But there are a couple of exceptions:

•        SAML Profile of XACML

•        REST Profile of XACML

•        JSON Profile of XACML

From this list it seems we have a clear preference for putting XACML first. That form avoids the version issue we had with the SAML Profile, since we can always unambiguously put in any versions we may want, e.g. XACML 3.0 SAML 2.0 Profile, Version 2.0. So I propose that we use that naming scheme for all new profiles.

Given that all three exceptions to this scheme have to go through another round of review, can we change their names to align them better with the others?

Thanks,

Ray

xacml message