Subject: [Txauth] name process

From: Dick Hardt <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2020 21:35:22 -0700

Here is proposed naming process. Feel free to provide feedback and
suggestions. Again, if you don't care, then also feel free to opt out of
participating!

1. agree on criteria / metrics for name

Nigel posted some metrics that the Perl community used for the replacement
to Perl 6. That seems like a good place to start

I'll post another thread with the metrics.

2. brainstorm names

The fun part! All suggestions are welcome.

3. rank names according to metrics

Nigel has volunteered to build a page to list all suggestions with metrics

ᐧ

---

From: Simon Moffatt <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 24 Apr 2020 09:00:32 +0100

FWIW, my 2c on naming things in general.

The first thing the 101 book of new product/campaign/solutions creation
would say, is to write the launch press release of the thing you're
creating.  That might seem counter-intuitive, but does a few things.
Articulates to a team what you're *aiming to achieve*, helps you
*visualize* and more importantly, helps a team generate a *"not to do"*
list. If the item doesn't help with delivering the items in press
release, park them. 

That press release will contain salient points: *who* are you helping
with *what*, and *why* you're the best at doing it. If you have that,
you retro fit the name to fit a) target audience b) value proposition.

When it comes to naming, I guess there seems to be a few conflicting
techniques being used. AFAIK, "Txauth" is not backwards compatible with
OAuth2. So any naming would need to indicate independence in order to
build trust and understanding.

As an orthogonal point always seems odd to me to use a placeholder like
"oauth.xyz" which looks incompatible with OAuth2. Isn't that a bit like
an alien trying to make a drink with baked beans instead of coffee beans?

The generic use of the "*auth*" could also be seen to pre-loaded.
Authentication vendors as well as authorization vendors have jumped on
this bandwagon rightly and wrongly. They have bizdev to worry about, but
the point being, that anyone sees the word "auth" in either connotation,
is going to have a set of unmovable biases.

Is that something you want to compete with? What is authentication? What
is authorization? That is a transaction? What is transactional
authorization?

The process seems to be going down two routes - "same, but different"
somethingAuth or authSomething, in an attempt to attract interest from
existing practitioners.

Alternatively, you go down the island naming route (entirely different,
isolated, catchy) - different and potentially back by an acronym.

SM

On 24/04/2020 5:35 am, Dick Hardt wrote:
> suggestions. Again, if you don't care, then also feel free to opt out
> of participating!
>
>     Nigel posted some metrics that the Perl community used for the
>     replacement to Perl 6. That seems like a good place to start
>
-- 
ForgeRock <https://www.forgerock.com/> 	*Simon Moffatt*
Product Management  |  ForgeRock
*t* (44) 7903 347 240  |  *e* [email-masked]
<mailto:[email-masked]>
*twitter* @simonmoffatt  |  *web* www.forgerock.com
<https://www.forgerock.com/>