The problem with the second one is that it's already taken by one of the
oldest and most used XML APIs in existence.
Dave
> -----Original Message-----
> From:
> [mailto:]
> Sent: Friday, January 26, 2001 9:23 AM
> To: Carlisle Adams
> Cc: ; 'Eve L. Maler'
> Subject: RE: New Name ! (A new suggestion)
>
>
> All
>
> OK, as long as we're naming, I'll float two proposals, both
> designed to be
> short, descriptive, easy to pronounce, and
> voted off Temptation Island :-)
>
> SAML (Security Assertion Markup Language)
> SAX (Security Assertion Exchange)
>
> I like the second better because it doesn't implicitly
> exclude from scope
> things we really seem to want
> to do, such as protocol bindings and request-response
> metaprotocols (which
> strictly speaking aren't part
> of the "markup language").
>
> --bob
>
> Bob Blakley
> Chief Scientist, Security
> Tivoli Systems, Inc.
>
>
> Carlisle Adams <> on 01/26/2001 10:53:26 AM
>
> To: , "'Eve L. Maler'"
> <>
> cc:
> Subject: RE: New Name ! (A new suggestion)
>
>
>
>
>
> Hi,
>
> I believe that the group has (rough) consensus that "S2ML" should be
> changed as the overall name of this OASIS TC spec because "Security
> Services" is too broad. I, for one, would not want to be in
> the shoes of
> the PR spokesperson (currently Eve!) trying to explain to
> some analyst or
> press representative why XKMS -- which is clear a security
> service -- is
> not within the scope of this TC.
>
> Perhaps not surprisingly, I have no objections to "A2ML", but I can
> understand the hesitation on the part of some who either feel that
> "Authentication" implies too much, or that "Authentication and
> Authorization" may be too narrow in scope.
>
> Therefore, I will offer another name for consideration (if
> only so that we
> have some competition for SEX-ML!). It seems to me that what
> this group
> would like to do is create a specification for the exchange
> of credentials.
> These credentials (today covering both authentication credentials and
> authorization credentials, but open in the future to other kinds of
> credentials that we may choose to embrace) will be expressed in XML.
> Furthermore, I think it is fair to say that the payload to be
> exchanged
> will always include at least one "active" -- that is,
> currently valid --
> credential (name assertion, entitlement assertion, whatever).
>
> Thus, my suggestion is: "Active XML Credentials Exchange
> Specification",
> which has the intuitive and somewhat appropriate acronym "AXCES"
> (pronounced "access").
>
> Carlisle.
>
>
>
