[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [security-services] Additional suggestions for naming changes
I vote no on "Conf" because I don't think it is not obvious what that is an abbreviation for. Agree with yes/no list below and have no problem with "Attr" and "Qualifier" (no strong feeling either way). Mike -----Original Message----- From: Eve L. Maler [mailto:Eve.Maler@Sun.COM] Sent: Wednesday, May 19, 2004 11:02 AM To: oasis sstc (E-mail) Subject: Re: [security-services] Additional suggestions for naming changes Okay, here's my (biased?) assessment what I've heard so far. Reference -> Ref yes Condition -> (null) yes Confirmation -> Conf maybe Attribute -> Attr maybe NameQualifier -> Qualifier maybe Assertion -> Assn no? Service -> Svc no Qualifier -> Qual no Statement -> Stmt no Reauthenticate -> Reauthn no If people can weigh in so that we get a clearer idea of the leanings, it sounds like Scott can implement, in proposed form, the ones with the most support. To continue my weigh-in here, I don't think NameQualifier -> Qualifier is a good idea because the parent element is not Name, but rather BaseID. Eve -- Eve Maler +1 781 442 3190 Sun Microsystems cell +1 781 354 9441 Web Products, Technologies, and Standards eve.maler @ sun.com To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from the roster of the OASIS TC), go to http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/security-services/members/l eave_workgroup.php.
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]