Refeds


Subject RE: edu ID branding
From "Andrew Cormack" <Andrew.Cormack@xxxxxx>
Date Tue, 1 Jun 2010 10:08:32 +0100

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Leif Johansson [mailto:leifj@xxxxxxxx]
> Sent: 01 June 2010 10:02
> To: Rhys Smith
> Cc: Mark Williams; refeds@xxxxxxxxxx;
> matt.shreeve@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [refeds] edu ID branding
> 
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> On 06/01/2010 11:00 AM, Rhys Smith wrote:
> > On 1 Jun 2010, at 11:35, Leif Johansson wrote:
> >> but the brand actually has to mean something
> >
> > Sorry - have to disagree here.
> >
> > The brand doesn't have to mean *anything*, and I'm extremely
doubtful
> we could ever create a brand that meaningfully expresses what
federated
> identity is all about that the average user in the street (edu-
> affiliated or not) can understand. Most notably, if even we could,
> users do not want to understand: they just want things to work as if
by
> magic.
> >
> 
> It has to mean something to the relying parties otherwize it won't get
> used.

Suggested counter-example: "Visa"

There has to be meaning *associated* with the brand, but any symbols
contained within the brand don't have to mean anything. The only
difference is to passing Martians who might, perhaps, value a
"Mastercard" over a "Visa" ?

Andrew