'relying party' and 'identity consumer'
drummond.reed at cordance.net
Sun Nov 27 21:55:03 PST 2005
+1 on using "relying party". It's primary advantage is that it is already
widely propagated by SAML. IMHO all identity terms need a little context if
they are going to be used with laymen, but within the community of folks
working on Internet identity technology, I think "relying party" is pretty
From: yadis-bounces at lists.danga.com [mailto:yadis-bounces at lists.danga.com]
On Behalf Of Josh Hoyt
Sent: Sunday, November 27, 2005 4:00 PM
To: Joaquin Miller
Cc: YADDIS list
Subject: Re: 'relying party' and 'identity consumer'
On 11/27/05, Joaquin Miller <joaquin at netmesh.us> wrote:
> A longer term, that carries with it the context, will be fine. Given how
> the world works, it will be shortened.
> How about, for example: 'proffered identifier relying party' ? A bit
> awkward. But that's OK. Same intended meaning as 'party relying on
> proffered identifier'.
If I understand correctly, you're proposing that we adopt a longer,
more descriptive term as the "official" name, and then, through common
usage, it will be shortened to "relying party". I'm not sure that that
really solves the problem of supplying context, since the shortened
"relying party" will have to be looked up to get the context anyway.
I'm +0 on changing our usage to "relying party" instead of "identity
consumer", but -1 on any other name, since that would just add to the
confusion, since there would then be three names floating aroung the
Web for the same thing.
More information about the yadis