headers
Gonzalo Camarillo | 23 Jan 2012 08:34
Picon
Favicon

Re: A comment on draft-ietf-simple-chat-12

Hi,

right, this sounds more like an identifier, because claiming that a
participant will be able to determine your identity when you are an
anonymous user is not clear at all.

In any case, I am OK with not specifying which exact identifier will be
used. However, the requirement should be clear that the vagueness was
introduced on purpose. An extra sentence should be enough for the reader
to understand what the requirement actually means.

Thanks,

Gonzalo

On 20/01/2012 5:05 PM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
> Further: I'd encourage you to use the word "identifier" because
> "identity" is vague and overloaded.
> 
> On 1/20/12 5:54 AM, Miguel A. Garcia wrote:
>> Gonzalo,
>>
>> The requirement talks on purpose about "identities" with the ambiguity
>> that the word "identities" carry, meaning that we don't really specify
>> whether those identities are SIP identities, tel URL identities,
>> nicknames, or social security identities :-)
>>
>> Then requirements 5 and 7 expand a bit more on the type of identities
>> that must be supported by the system.
>>
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply |
headers
Miguel A. Garcia | 23 Jan 2012 08:46
Picon
Favicon

Re: A comment on draft-ietf-simple-chat-12

I agree with Peter's and Gonzalo's subsequent comment.

So, we will replace "identity" with "identifier" and clarify that the 
type of identifier is determined by the following requirements.

/Miguel

On 23/01/2012 8:34, Gonzalo Camarillo wrote:
> Hi,
>
> right, this sounds more like an identifier, because claiming that a
> participant will be able to determine your identity when you are an
> anonymous user is not clear at all.
>
> In any case, I am OK with not specifying which exact identifier will be
> used. However, the requirement should be clear that the vagueness was
> introduced on purpose. An extra sentence should be enough for the reader
> to understand what the requirement actually means.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Gonzalo
>
>
> On 20/01/2012 5:05 PM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
>> Further: I'd encourage you to use the word "identifier" because
>> "identity" is vague and overloaded.
>>
>> On 1/20/12 5:54 AM, Miguel A. Garcia wrote:
>>> Gonzalo,
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply |
headers
Gonzalo Camarillo | 23 Jan 2012 09:10
Picon
Favicon

Re: A comment on draft-ietf-simple-chat-12

Hi Miguel Angel,

thanks. As soon as the new revision hits the archives I will initiate
the IETF LC.

Cheers,

Gonzalo

On 23/01/2012 9:46 AM, Miguel Garcia A wrote:
> I agree with Peter's and Gonzalo's subsequent comment.
> 
> So, we will replace "identity" with "identifier" and clarify that the 
> type of identifier is determined by the following requirements.
> 
> /Miguel
> 
> On 23/01/2012 8:34, Gonzalo Camarillo wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> right, this sounds more like an identifier, because claiming that a
>> participant will be able to determine your identity when you are an
>> anonymous user is not clear at all.
>>
>> In any case, I am OK with not specifying which exact identifier will be
>> used. However, the requirement should be clear that the vagueness was
>> introduced on purpose. An extra sentence should be enough for the reader
>> to understand what the requirement actually means.
>>
>> Thanks,
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply |
headers
Miguel A. Garcia | 23 Jan 2012 10:42
Picon
Favicon

Re: A comment on draft-ietf-simple-chat-12

Hi:

I have just posted version -13. I have replaced "identity" with 
"identifier" in most of the occurrences throughout the document. 
Additionally, I had clarified that requirement #2 refers to the 
identifier used by the sender or recipient when he/she joined the chat room.

I think this is ready now.

BR,

        Miguel

On 23/01/2012 9:10, Gonzalo Camarillo wrote:
> Hi Miguel Angel,
>
> thanks. As soon as the new revision hits the archives I will initiate
> the IETF LC.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Gonzalo
>
> On 23/01/2012 9:46 AM, Miguel Garcia A wrote:
>> I agree with Peter's and Gonzalo's subsequent comment.
>>
>> So, we will replace "identity" with "identifier" and clarify that the
>> type of identifier is determined by the following requirements.
>>
>> /Miguel
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply |
headers
Gonzalo Camarillo | 23 Jan 2012 15:03
Picon
Favicon

Re: A comment on draft-ietf-simple-chat-12

Hi,

thanks. I have just requested the IETF LC.

Cheers,

Gonzalo

On 23/01/2012 11:42 AM, Miguel Garcia A wrote:
> Hi:
> 
> I have just posted version -13. I have replaced "identity" with 
> "identifier" in most of the occurrences throughout the document. 
> Additionally, I had clarified that requirement #2 refers to the 
> identifier used by the sender or recipient when he/she joined the chat room.
> 
> I think this is ready now.
> 
> BR,
> 
>         Miguel
> 
> On 23/01/2012 9:10, Gonzalo Camarillo wrote:
>> Hi Miguel Angel,
>>
>> thanks. As soon as the new revision hits the archives I will initiate
>> the IETF LC.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply |

Gmane