OP Identifier vs. OP-Specific Identifier

[Dick Hardt]

If you are suggesting to remove terminology that we don't really  
need, you have my full support!

-- Dick

On 19-Nov-06, at 10:53 PM, Recordon, David wrote:

> You're confusing my lamenting with actually have a solution to  
> propose.
> :-\
>
> Personally I'd keep the terminology section simple and then define new
> terms in context as needed.
>
> --David
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dick Hardt [mailto:dick at sxip.com]
> Sent: Sunday, November 19, 2006 10:37 PM
> To: Recordon, David
> Cc: specs at openid.net
> Subject: Re: OP Identifier vs. OP-Specific Identifier
>
> What would you propose?
>
> I think the terminology should follow the parameter names we have.
>
> The fact that one of the parameters is called "identity" adds more  
> fuel
> to the confusion. :-)
>
> -- Dick
>
> On 19-Nov-06, at 5:12 PM, Recordon, David wrote:
>
>> So I'm working on cleaning up the terminology section with edits from
>> Drummond.  On first read I had no idea what the difference between  
>> "OP
>
>> Identifier" and "OP-Specific Identifier" were.  Now that my brain has
>> kicked in I do, but I have the feeling this is going to be really
>> confusing for others reading the specification.
>>
>> I really think we need to get our terminology down, since right  
>> now it
>
>> is honestly quite confusing:
>>  - Identifier (umbrella definition)
>>  - Claimed Identifier (umbrella definition)
>>  - OP-Specific Identifier (needs context)
>>  - OP Identifier (needs context)
>>  - Public Identifier (tries to create context)
>>  - Private Identifier (tries to create context)
>>  - Privacy-protected login (have we even defined this)
>>
>> How can we clean this up?  I think the problem is that we're  
>> trying to
>
>> describe features via the terminology section.
>>
>> --David
>> _______________________________________________
>> specs mailing list
>> specs at openid.net
>> http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/specs
>>
>>
>
>
>