Re: [Txauth] Name criteria

Hankins Parichabutr <hankins.parichabutr@gmail.com> Tue, 28 April 2020 19:43 UTC

Return-Path: <hankins.parichabutr@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: txauth@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: txauth@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9B6A23A0D82 for <txauth@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 28 Apr 2020 12:43:24 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.096
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.096 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_FONT_LOW_CONTRAST=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id JnE_VApYeB_a for <txauth@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 28 Apr 2020 12:43:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ua1-x934.google.com (mail-ua1-x934.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::934]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B8A683A0921 for <txauth@ietf.org>; Tue, 28 Apr 2020 12:43:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-ua1-x934.google.com with SMTP id b6so8956484uak.6 for <txauth@ietf.org>; Tue, 28 Apr 2020 12:43:00 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=6uQSsIGoR6nSGjA0KbtWUcY5jbX65iKJZrVBEl4/68I=; b=ijmnPXxDvlFZ80jSii3MOgbEHEgVOgJ/ej6jga7+ZZ4N4mTY2WXrO4+zbNJTP+cYg7 +vvSQrz6KweuoZjO+SI64bD4v2X6+9lWPh/jx2Re5qzVbIv7VHJ7EH8Pndlj1ovG7uyH dyxCGgac3O9+uNpC1hbdX99iOgKRbgEaPHSaRWtJwSxEki3iV2TE/swOodHvwkoU9lrp RQGP20bMcxF5vFaxreyfg7hK8TCjqsXxIE6CpTRf+WeqzqwoCBQXA0Xz8utWpojs/1St 91QEmiWqdu4X41A9ewUpzOBwqp0SA7MPXLIrBwlBb1p3x/iZgSkJagZJIO1/W+g1d7Iq zXBQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=6uQSsIGoR6nSGjA0KbtWUcY5jbX65iKJZrVBEl4/68I=; b=AdHzhfYgr54NKnDavIOxBjXXqI+IBq725qrOmGpMraYF0Mk23mxfriKtda5D5XJyEq THbLf590wGAJN1pdKQWaKZLYcxbyrPkH8sKyAM0fyLlydAe2D8qWDUH3wbzvM1hOVzvy jXfdjgiJ8VNV5CGQRzp67lq7gMFJR9Jr0pGxs+PslDjBBjVBhloUtHRD9Vd4FovbT5vB e9Aw3QrhQg/ouKNBosvsMM+1/VVnsIHFOCUIv8c6QwZiyue7TbI11A6Tg4bk7e0Y78XG 9FfoDpIhVqF60Wp/Z/T+gEB0Ka5T12WxHGe3KXeutOTmRJI0kg+/3NYvli5w5mkdIHWG UZ5A==
X-Gm-Message-State: AGi0PuZePwRS/mBqel0a9OIXU16mCjNwowy0G3nYPA9z/LnsSfiOK3ul S7UnYa9gHQA5PuBUD5SD/VWG8seIPxGhGsp2UPx7UmTNuS8=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APiQypKitWV8OyZmCUgNaaSTbEWjnCyCUh2O97yEXQYm03knMabEIYSfiLUM6GizDCj5dlS8ZDne6ZXDMjf04La2l58=
X-Received: by 2002:ab0:1166:: with SMTP id g38mr23142865uac.40.1588102979272; Tue, 28 Apr 2020 12:42:59 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <mailman.1997.1588098540.9105.txauth@ietf.org>
In-Reply-To: <mailman.1997.1588098540.9105.txauth@ietf.org>
From: Hankins Parichabutr <hankins.parichabutr@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2020 15:42:22 -0400
Message-ID: <CAOvbAbX8m9zWy_Muy3CQAmvCNMsnDdf1W7D+UDn-N-R6+Q1PzA@mail.gmail.com>
To: txauth@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000f244e305a45f09fc"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/txauth/crKzIPPbqnC1FtBW_LcHrfP1qn0>
Subject: Re: [Txauth] Name criteria
X-BeenThere: txauth@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: <txauth.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/txauth>, <mailto:txauth-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/txauth/>
List-Post: <mailto:txauth@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:txauth-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/txauth>, <mailto:txauth-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2020 19:43:28 -0000

@Amanjeev beat me to this...

I'm also wondering whether "intent" and/or "delegation" are useful to the
naming:
+ Intent-based
+ Intentional authorization
+ Intentional delegation

Regards,
Hankins Parichabutr
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .


On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 2:29 PM <txauth-request@ietf.org> wrote:

> Send Txauth mailing list submissions to
>         txauth@ietf.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>         https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/txauth
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>         txauth-request@ietf.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
>         txauth-owner@ietf.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Txauth digest..."
> Today's Topics:
>
>    1. Re: Name criteria (Amanjeev Sethi)
>    2. Re: Name criteria (Daniel Fett)
>    3. Re: Name criteria (Dick Hardt)
>    4. Re: Name criteria (Justin Richer)
>
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Amanjeev Sethi <aj@amanjeev.com>
> To: Dick Hardt <dick.hardt@gmail.com>, Daniel Fett <fett@danielfett.de>
> Cc: txauth@ietf.org
> Bcc:
> Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2020 13:58:00 -0400
> Subject: Re: [Txauth] Name criteria
> Does no one think that "intent driven" can be used for creating a name?
>
> On Tue, Apr 28, 2020, at 1:54 PM, Dick Hardt wrote:
>
> Daniel: I'm in favor of the intent of your suggestion -- but curious which
> languages we would test that in. Doing it for all languages is impractical.
> A negative connotation may also be a locale rather than language specific.
> For example, a fag in the UK (a cigarette) is very different than a fag in
> the US/Canada (offensive term for a homosexual man).
> ᐧ
>
> On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 10:09 AM Daniel Fett <fett@danielfett.de> wrote:
>
> Am 28.04.20 um 19:04 schrieb Dick Hardt:
>
> Revised criteria:
>
> Required:
>
>    1. No confusion with another protocol, major software project, or
>    IETF/IRTF WG name
>    2. no existing registered trademarks in related classes
>    3. Less than 1M results in Google
>    4. Descriptive of protocol (this criteria is subjective)
>
> Desirable:
>
>    1. Straightforward to pronounce
>    2. Easy to spell
>    3. Easy to read
>    4. Shortish
>
> 5. Not a negatively connotated word in another language
>
> -Daniel
> --
> Txauth mailing list
> Txauth@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/txauth
>
> --
> Txauth mailing list
> Txauth@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/txauth
>
>
>
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Daniel Fett <fett@danielfett.de>
> To: Dick Hardt <dick.hardt@gmail.com>
> Cc: txauth@ietf.org
> Bcc:
> Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2020 20:01:26 +0200
> Subject: Re: [Txauth] Name criteria
> Am 28.04.20 um 19:54 schrieb Dick Hardt:
>
> Daniel: I'm in favor of the intent of your suggestion -- but curious which
> languages we would test that in. Doing it for all languages is impractical.
> A negative connotation may also be a locale rather than language specific.
> For example, a fag in the UK (a cigarette) is very different than a fag in
> the US/Canada (offensive term for a homosexual man).
>
> If it is in the Urban Dictionary, it is probably a bad choice ;-)
>
> No, seriously, I guess we can just google for "<x> definition", "<x>
> translation" and see what comes up.
>
> -Daniel
>
>
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Dick Hardt <dick.hardt@gmail.com>
> To: Daniel Fett <fett@danielfett.de>
> Cc: txauth@ietf.org
> Bcc:
> Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2020 11:11:30 -0700
> Subject: Re: [Txauth] Name criteria
> But which languages are we checking? There are alot in the world. The
> phonetics of the name could be offensive -- ie it could be an offensive
> word when said in China or Japan. I don't know how to use google to
> search phonetics.
> ᐧ
>
> On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 11:01 AM Daniel Fett <fett@danielfett.de> wrote:
>
>> Am 28.04.20 um 19:54 schrieb Dick Hardt:
>>
>> Daniel: I'm in favor of the intent of your suggestion -- but curious
>> which languages we would test that in. Doing it for all languages is
>> impractical. A negative connotation may also be a locale rather than
>> language specific.. For example, a fag in the UK (a cigarette) is very
>> different than a fag in the US/Canada (offensive term for a homosexual man).
>>
>> If it is in the Urban Dictionary, it is probably a bad choice ;-)
>>
>> No, seriously, I guess we can just google for "<x> definition", "<x>
>> translation" and see what comes up.
>>
>> -Daniel
>>
>>
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Justin Richer <jricher@mit.edu>
> To: Amanjeev Sethi <aj@amanjeev.com>
> Cc: Dick Hardt <dick.hardt@gmail.com>, Daniel Fett <fett@danielfett.de>,
> txauth@ietf.org
> Bcc:
> Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2020 14:28:48 -0400
> Subject: Re: [Txauth] Name criteria
> I think that both “intent driven” and “intent registration” are good
> starting points, as that’s one of several key aspects to this proposed
> solution space. The flexibility of the interaction (and non-reliance on web
> browsers for it) is another important aspect.
>
> So interactive intent of some flavor might be an inspiration.
>
>  — Justin
>
> On Apr 28, 2020, at 1:58 PM, Amanjeev Sethi <aj@amanjeev.com> wrote:
>
> Does no one think that "intent driven" can be used for creating a name?
>
> On Tue, Apr 28, 2020, at 1:54 PM, Dick Hardt wrote:
>
> Daniel: I'm in favor of the intent of your suggestion -- but curious which
> languages we would test that in. Doing it for all languages is impractical.
> A negative connotation may also be a locale rather than language specific.
> For example, a fag in the UK (a cigarette) is very different than a fag in
> the US/Canada (offensive term for a homosexual man).
> ᐧ
>
> On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 10:09 AM Daniel Fett <fett@danielfett.de> wrote:
>
> Am 28.04.20 um 19:04 schrieb Dick Hardt:
>
> Revised criteria:
>
> Required:
>
>    1. No confusion with another protocol, major software project, or
>    IETF/IRTF WG name
>    2. no existing registered trademarks in related classes
>    3. Less than 1M results in Google
>    4. Descriptive of protocol (this criteria is subjective)
>
> Desirable:
>
>    1. Straightforward to pronounce
>    2. Easy to spell
>    3. Easy to read
>    4. Shortish
>
> 5. Not a negatively connotated word in another language
>
> -Daniel
> --
> Txauth mailing list
> Txauth@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/txauth
>
> --
> Txauth mailing list
> Txauth@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/txauth
>
>
> --
> Txauth mailing list
> Txauth@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/txauth
>
>
> Txauth mailing list
> Txauth@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/txauth
>