Re: [saag] FW: Call for consensus on SPICE charter

[Denis <[e-mail]>]

If a WG is formed,  it should not be called *SPICE*.  For example, it 
could be called : *DICE *for *Di*gital *C*r*e*dentials.

Note: a DICE WG existed 10 years ago, but is now concluded.

Alternative names are also possible.

Denis

> How about Digital Identities and Credentials?
>
> Now sure why “Secure Patterns” is stressed in WG name for SPICE 
> (Secure Patterns for Internet CrEdentials)?
>
> We may say that all internet protocols are about patterns, but not 
> just patterns. Still about definitions, use cases, algorithms etc.
>
> Guilin
>
> *From:*saag <[e-mail]> *On Behalf Of *Michael Jones
> *Sent:* Thursday, 15 February 2024 1:52 am
> *To:* Orie Steele <[e-mail]>; Michael Richardson 
> <[e-mail]>
> *Cc:* saag <[e-mail]>
> *Subject:* Re: [saag] FW: Call for consensus on SPICE charter
>
> I’d prefer that we keep the term “Digital Credentials”.  It’s already 
> in widespread use with this meaning.  For instance, it’s used in the 
> name of the OpenID Digital Credentials Working Group 
> (https://openid.net/wg/digital-credentials-protocols/) Inventing 
> another name will only have the effect described in https://xkcd.com/927/.
>
> Yes, naming is hard.
>
> (BTW, I supported the charter in the main thread.)
>
> -- Mike
>
> *From:*saag <[e-mail]> *On Behalf Of *Orie Steele
> *Sent:* Saturday, February 10, 2024 6:50 AM
> *To:* Michael Richardson <[e-mail]>
> *Cc:* saag <[e-mail]>
> *Subject:* Re: [saag] FW: Call for consensus on SPICE charter
>
> I opened this issue with some alternative names for consideration:
>
> https://github.com/transmute-industries/ietf-spice-charter/issues/30
>
> If possible I would like to preserve the acronym, although I suppose 
> it would be ok to follow the lamps pattern and have a list that does 
> not match the working group name (lamps vs spasm).
>
> If you wish to bikeshed names in higher bandwidth, I invite you to the 
> #spice channel in the IETF slack.
>
> https://join.slack.com/t/ietf/shared_invite/zt-2craxeqbk-qLF0Wvk3O9cLIYdpnDA58w
>
> Regards,
>
> OS
>
> On Fri, Feb 9, 2024 at 5:01 PM Michael Richardson 
> <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:
>
>
>     Eric Rescorla <[e-mail]> wrote:
>         > I agree it's too large. I took it from the title of the WG,
>     which is
>         > "Secure Patterns for Internet Credentials".
>
>         > If we don't like that, maybe should change the WG name as well.
>
>     (I also don't like the WG name, but I already said that three times)
>
>     --
>     Michael Richardson <[e-mail]
>     <mailto:[e-mail]>>  . o O ( IPv6 IøT consulting )
>                Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide
>
>
>
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     saag mailing list
>     [e-mail]
>     https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/saag
>
>
> -- 
>
> *ORIE STEELE
> *Chief Technology Officer
> www.transmute.industries <http://www.transmute.industries/>
>
> <https://transmute.industries/>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> saag mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/saag