Re: [apps-discuss] using the name "simple web discovery" to replace the name "webfinger"?

[William Mills <[e-mail]>]

I think it would be odd to change the working name of the extant draft for what is really a relatively small set of changes.  I do not think we should change the name.

-bill

P.S. if we were starting from scratch picking names I would favor SWD over WF





>________________________________
> From: Michiel de Jong <[e-mail]>
>To: Apps Discuss <[e-mail]> 
>Sent: Sunday, June 10, 2012 12:07 AM
>Subject: [apps-discuss] using the name "simple web discovery" to replace the name "webfinger"?
> 
>The webfinger spec
>(http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-jones-appsawg-webfinger-05 ) and the
>simple web discovery spec
>(http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-jones-simple-web-discovery-02 ) are
>being merged into one thing.
>
>We need a name to refer to the result of this merge. This means we
>need to pick one of the names to go forward with, and deprecate the
>other name, or pick a new name altogether and deprecate both current
>names.
>
>I think currently 'bare user@host vs acct:user@host' and 'xml or json
>vs only json' are two points that still need to be resolved before the
>merge is complete, right? Anyway, that's not the topic of this thread
>- let's just suppose a consensus will be reached, and the specs will
>be merged.
>
>Then, I think Blaine Cook, Paul Jones and Mike Jones have all
>indicated in previous threads that they are open to picking 'simple
>web discovery' as the new name.
>
>FWIW, i personally am the kind of person who enjoys giving nice names
>to things, and i particularly enjoy saying 'webfinger' because it's
>more creative, less boring, and funnier as a name. Also, to me it
>makes perfect sense that it's "finger for the web". However, in my
>experience explaining to people that remoteStorage
>(http://www.w3.org/community/unhosted/wiki/RemoteStorage ) combines
>XHR with CORS, OAuth and webfinger, people usually know what XHR is
>(especially if i call it AJAX), 50% know what OAuth is, and for CORS
>the face i get from them is 'oh that must be some sort of special
>mechanism'.
>
>The face i sometimes (not always) get for webfinger is 'huh? is that a
>real thing?'. :) also, when i do explain webfinger to people, unless
>they look like old school finger users, i tell them it is 'a simple
>mechanism for  discovering service on the web'. So it is my opinion
>that 'simple web discovery' would be a (more boring, but) better name
>than 'webfinger'. A downside would be that we need to update it
>everywhere, but i guess we can get over that.
>
>maybe other people have other experiences or insights about this name choice?
>
>
>Cheers,
>Michiel
>_______________________________________________
>apps-discuss mailing list
>[e-mail]
>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss
>
>
>