Shibboleth Developers

[Nate Klingenstein <>]

Given that it's the identifier for a provider (service or identity), 
overloaded or not, I'd suggest it's a good fit for what we're trying to 
describe.  It's also the formal term in the SAML standards(see 
3.4.1.3.1 of SAML 2.0 Core, among others) and it would nice to be 
consistent.

On Jun 23, 2005, at 13:23, Tom Scavo wrote:

> Also, I think we should start using the term "entityID" rather than
> "providerId" in our documentation and writing.  As Howard has pointed
> out, the latter is hopelessly overloaded.