Tony, I’m curious about this. In an
earlier post Mike said:
“There will always be a potential for
confusion between juridical entity and digital entity, or subject and digital
subject, or principal and ... Its my opinion that we never "enter"
juridical entities into our system, we create "out-of-band"
associations between juridical and digital entities, that we can change at any
time with no reflection in the system.”
I have found that it’s near
impossible to fully describe digital identity systems without being able to
explain that they provide digital representations of whatever-you-want-to-call-the-entity-being-represented.
So from a practical perspective it really helps to have two different terms, even
if they use modifiers (such as Mike’s “juridical entity” and “digital
entity”).
The problem I find semantically with using
modifiers on the same base term is: a) if you leave the modifier off, the term
becomes ambiguous, and b) frequency of usage strongly favors single word terms.
So I agree with Paul that two different
terms – ideally both single words – works best. Currently that’s
“node” (for the digital representation) and “entity”
(for the real-world principal). But if we switch, I still think we’ll be
better off with two separate terms for the digital representation and the
thing-being-represented.
=Drummond
From:
higgins-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:higgins-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Anthony Nadalin
Sent: Sunday, February 24, 2008
8:50 PM
To: Higgins (Trust Framework)
Project developer discussions
Cc: 'Higgins (Trust Framework)
Project developer discussions'; higgins-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [higgins-dev] With 7
people having voted so far...
Everything is an Entity, so no replacements needed
Anthony Nadalin | Work 512.838.0085 | Cell 512.289.4122
"Paul
Trevithick" ---02/24/2008 10:01:54 PM---Anyone who votes for entity has
the extra burden of suggesting a second word to replace “real
world”
|
From:
|
"Paul
Trevithick" <paul@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
|
|
To:
|
"'Higgins
\(Trust Framework\) Project developer discussions'"
<higgins-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
|
|
Cc:
|
<higgins-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx>
|
|
Date:
|
02/24/2008 10:01 PM
|
|
Subject:
|
RE: [higgins-dev]
With 7 people having voted so far...
|
Anyone who votes for entity has the extra burden of
suggesting a second word to
replace “real world” entities (like
people, objects, organizations, software programs, etc.) that are being represented by a node-whatever.
From: higgins-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:higgins-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Anthony Nadalin
Sent: Sunday, February 24, 2008 5:43 PM
To: Higgins (Trust Framework) Project developer discussions
Cc: Higgins (Trust Framework) Project developer discussions;
higgins-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [higgins-dev] With 7 people having voted so far...
Open to
everyone that votes for "entity"
Anthony Nadalin | Work 512.838.0085 | Cell 512.289.4122
"Uppili
Srinivasan" ---02/24/2008 04:34:15 PM---Is this voting a privilege for
only the contributors or can interested commons vote? :-)
|
From:
|
"Uppili Srinivasan" <uppili.srinivasan@xxxxxxxxxx>
|
|
To:
|
"Higgins \(Trust Framework\) Project developer discussions"
<higgins-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
|
|
Date:
|
02/24/2008 04:34 PM
|
|
Subject:
|
Re: [higgins-dev] With 7 people having voted so far...
|
Is this voting a privilege for only the contributors or can interested commons
vote? :-)
----- Original Message -----
From: Paul Trevithick
To: 'Higgins (Trust Framework) Project
developer discussions'
Sent: Sunday, February 24, 2008 12:11 PM
Subject: RE: [higgins-dev] With 7 people having voted so far...
Sorry, should have been more clear about that. Yes, vote for more than one.
[Greg, if you find another computer/device with a different IP address, you can
vote again and add your missing input. Let me know if that’s not good
enough]
From: higgins-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:higgins-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Greg Byrd
Sent: Saturday, February 23, 2008 1:36 PM
To: Higgins (Trust Framework) Project developer discussions
Subject: Re: [higgins-dev] With 7 people having voted so far...
Hmm. Seven responders and 12 responses. I didn't know we could/should vote for
more than one.
...Greg
_______________________________________________
higgins-dev mailing list
higgins-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/higgins-dev_______________________________________________
higgins-dev mailing list
higgins-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/higgins-dev_______________________________________________
higgins-dev mailing list
higgins-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/higgins-dev
