Renaming the "resource" parameter

10 views
Skip to first unread message

Paul E. Jones

unread,
Feb 7, 2013, 3:48:14 PM2/7/13
to webf...@ietf.org, webf...@googlegroups.com

Folks,

 

In the most recent round of edits (I hope to publish tomorrow) I made a pass through the text to try to use the word “resource” or “WebFinger resource” rather than “WebFinger server” where it made sense.  (“Server” is still used, but hopefully only when speaking of the web server itself.)

 

But, as I did that, I noticed that in at least one place the word “resource” (referring to the parameter that gets passed in) seemed to make the text confusing.  I put quotes around “resource” when I’m referring to the parameter.

 

The question is this: should we rename the “resource” parameter to something else?

 

SWD used “principal” and the JRD uses the term “subject”.  I think either of those would work as alternatives.

 

Or, shall we continue with “resource”?  I think it’s worded so that it’s not confusing now, but I’m probably a poor judge of that since I know is meant.

 

Paul

 

Tim Bray

unread,
Feb 7, 2013, 3:53:09 PM2/7/13
to Paul E. Jones, webf...@ietf.org, webf...@googlegroups.com
“resource” is fine. -T


_______________________________________________
webfinger mailing list
webf...@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webfinger


Brad Fitzpatrick

unread,
Feb 7, 2013, 3:53:11 PM2/7/13
to webf...@googlegroups.com, webf...@ietf.org
I like "subject".

I dislike "principal".

I also don't really care.



On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 12:48 PM, Paul E. Jones <pau...@packetizer.com> wrote:

--
 
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "WebFinger" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to webfinger+...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
 
 

Gonzalo Salgueiro

unread,
Feb 7, 2013, 3:59:42 PM2/7/13
to Paul E. Jones, webf...@ietf.org, webf...@googlegroups.com
At this point "resource" is cemented in my mind as the name for the parameter. My preference is to stick with it. Using quotes seems a sufficient clarification of its usage as a parameter.

Gonzalo

Mike Jones

unread,
Feb 7, 2013, 10:30:31 PM2/7/13
to Gonzalo Salgueiro, Paul E. Jones, webf...@ietf.org, webf...@googlegroups.com
I wouldn't rename it at this point "resource" is fine.

-- Mike

Paul E. Jones

unread,
Feb 8, 2013, 10:00:32 AM2/8/13
to Evan Prodromou, webf...@ietf.org, webf...@googlegroups.com

Ok, we’ll leave the parameter name alone.

 

From: Evan Prodromou [mailto:ev...@status.net]
Sent: Friday, February 08, 2013 9:30 AM
To: Paul E. Jones
Cc: webf...@ietf.org; webf...@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [webfinger] Renaming the "resource" parameter

 

-1, it's good enough, no change.

-Evan

Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages