-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 4
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Updated glossary #123
Updated glossary #123
Conversation
Signed-off-by: Hadrian Zbarcea <[email protected]>
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Some definitions in the glossary are overly specific, referencing particular solutions instead of describing the concepts in a more generic way. Since the glossary, like the use cases, is meant to be solution-agnostic, it would be better to generalise these terms. Additionally, some entries are incomplete or inconsistent in detail. That said, the glossary provides a starting point.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I strongly advise ordering these alphanumerically by the defined term, not by any subjective method. Alphanumeric order is typical for glossaries and dictionaries.
@csarven all definitions come from an authoritative source, like NIST or W3C. I don't see in any way how they would reference any particular solution. Can you please be more specific about which definition and what would be your suggested verbiage? |
Co-authored-by: Ted Thibodeau Jr <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Ted Thibodeau Jr <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Ted Thibodeau Jr <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Ted Thibodeau Jr <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Ted Thibodeau Jr <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Ted Thibodeau Jr <[email protected]>
If you want to re-use existing terms from "authoritative" sources, simply link to them instead of redefining or paraphrasing. Referencing specific specifications, e.g., Controlled Identifier (Document) locks the terms - which obviously limits alternative interpretations or solutions. The UC document should remain solution-agnostic, focusing on core concepts rather than prescribing a single approach. Also, if strict definitions from external sources are the standard here, it's unclear why key terms like "Storage", "Application", and many other remain undefined after extensive discussion. And, there are still many other that's not listed or defined here. So, perhaps let's just get this PR in and hope for the best in the follow ups.. |
Signed-off-by: Hadrian Zbarcea <[email protected]>
- <dfn>Entity</dfn> — An individual (person), organization, device, or process. Used interchangeably with “party”; see [NIST definition](https://csrc.nist.gov/glossary/term/entity). | ||
- <dfn>Identifier</dfn> — The bit string denoting the identifier associated with an Entity; see [NIST definition](https://csrc.nist.gov/glossary/term/identifier). | ||
- <dfn>Identity Provider</dfn> — a Service Provider that operates an Identity Service; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Every entry should be standalone and probably end with a period.
Preview | Diff