Mark,
To answer your question -- we have indeed considered other names for
this document on more than one occasion. The latest name is our best
attempt to date.
The properties we're trying to capture with this latest name ("Enabling
Read Access for Web Resources") are as follows:
1. The specification is focused on enabling, not restrict access
2. The specification is specifically targeted to read access, not
enabling/restricting linking, img src=, etc. or any other type of
access
3. The specification is generalizable to any web resource, not just
an XML document
The title you suggested ("Client-side Web Access Control") doesn't
capture any properties 1 and 2. The title seems even more generic as it
implies generalized access-control for web browsers but doesn't specify
what or who the access-control to (users, documents, user agents).
I think we're all interested in having the best title possible. Perhaps
you can give some more constructive feedback beyond "horribly generic"?
Are there properties of the specification that you would like to see
better captured in the title (e.g. client/server)? Which terms seem
overly-general or easily confused?
Brad
Mark Nottingham wrote:
One other thing; have you considered other names for this thing? The
current one is horribly generic and confusing.
How about "Client-Side Web Access Control"?
--
Mark Nottingham [EMAIL PROTECTED]
