[RFC] Public Name System: Resolution and RDF

one more for the list: PPN - Perpetual Public Name

1 Like

Or ANT: Alias/Adress Name/Naming Thesaurus/Translation/Transition.
You could also make it ANTS (S of System).

I voted for another name in the poll (sorry!): Safe Resolution Register (SRR)

I think it should contain SAFE. Also, it’s a subjective register. Apps might make up their own. Perhaps only MaidSafe might endorse the single global name register, who knows. It’s a matter of changing the tag type or hashing algorithm to get a new resolution mechanism. (I assume MaidSafes RFC mentions a fixed tag type.)

All the acronyms in the poll sound very generic. Why not just extend what is already known — prefix DNS with SAFE: SDNS.

I love this, just like I love to discuss the color of my bike shed. Although this is of course less trivial and will be an important part in many ideas and designs.

I’ve added some of what i could see as the better names to the poll

Sorry @drehb had to choose only one and human XOR mapping seemed odd and space naming seems odd too, are we naming stars in space

Please revise your vote if you wish to choose one of the other names I added

As most of the other MaidSafers will tell you, I think the naming of these things is super important (they are probably sick of me in this regard :joy: … sorry-not-sorry). It’s a pretty critical part of a user experience, and getting it wrong can lead to a whole world of painful fudges, and linguistic gymnastics in everything from button labelling, to GUI layouts, to unnecessary marketing and support documentation; or even unpicking and backtracking it at a later date. /shudders/

This of course is no exception. But I do think trying to sort the acronym first—or even naming the system as a whole—is the tail wagging the dog.

The important consideration of the language in this case is how people will refer to, and understand, the equivalent of the ‘domain name’ itself, not in the description of the underlying system that enables this naming.

And it’s really important we consider this from the end user’s point-of-view—in the sense of their daily interaction with the network—rather than their need to understand how the system functions.

It’s far more more important for user than the equivalent on the clearnet, simply because nearly every user will, at some point, create their own Public/Domain Name. It’s pretty much a prerequisite for using the system for regular comms. Whereas the opposite is true for the clearnet, where average users don’t really have a need to own a domain name.

So getting a bit in side the mental model of users in this is how we will come to the best solution. And of course, we can test it too. As an example, think of the labelling of a prompt when a new user is being on-boarded.

“Now, create a X Name. You can publish a site using this as an address, or use it like a username when you set up your profile.”

So things like Open, Decentralised, Perpetual, Safe become a bit tougher in this regard. There’s a bit more cognitive load, and space for misunderstanding, or confusion.

Public Name is a lot closer to the function of the thing, and Domain Name is something that already has a pretty clear meaning, and would probably be the solution with the least friction.

The naming of the system should be a secondary consideration, and I think we’ll be able to cope with whatever the best solution to the first problem throws out. E.g. SDNS (SAFE Domain Name System).


Completey agree @JimCollinson. They do say engineers shouldn’t be allowed to name things - and with good reason! I remember when I was first experimenting with Linux years ago. I have no computing background at all and all those in-jokes and recursive tricks used as names (GNU = Gnu’s not Unix FFS) and clunky-sounding non-descriptive words like awk, and grep drove me to distraction (I still can’t remember what awk is, or sed). That’s why I asked above who is the main audience for PNS or whatever it ends up being called. If it’s programmers using a CLI, it’s not so important - although I’m sure everyone appreciates a logical naming system, as @oetyng has mentioned. But if it’s non-technical end users then it’s critical.


I could be wrong, but I think most are not really that interested in what the acronym is or even if there is an acronym (at this stage). As long as it is not PNS or something with a similar 2nd meaning.
Keep also in mind that there can be the intention to replace PNS later when things become more clear, but that that doesn’t happen or becomes difficult because the name has sticked.


That is what I considered as well.

1 Like

Ok for a laugh here’s my ideas!

Friendly Naming System (FNS) - because SAFE is self descriptive and so is FNS. Who wouldn’t want to use a friendly system?!


Identity Data (ID) which could be extended to Identity Data System (IDs) when needed. Works for plural and singular, has a consistent existing meaning and is only maybe slightly confusing and self-referential.


Well everybody the last option for this round has been added.

Please update your vote if you want to change it.

Some said ID should not be a candidate so I choose your first one for the last option for the poll. We can have another if people think any other name has a chance.

For easier access, here’s a link to the post with the poll:

Something I’ve been mulling over the weekend, and chatting about this morning is the term Public Name.

At first this seems like a good, and reasonably descriptive alternative to Domain Name.

However, given that they will be the basis of the human readable SafeID address/handle, it is perhaps a mistake to call them Public. What If I just want to create a username to communicate in private with my friends? What if the SafeID is created using unpublished/shared data, and not publicly viewable?

Asking a user to create a “Public” name when they only desire to communicate privately (which the system still allows) might be confusing and misleading.


How about SAFE ID - SID?

We already potentially have SafeID as the name for webIDs on the Safe Network

1 Like

AID - Account ID or Associated ID or Alias ID?

1 Like

With plural form aids

Well… Domain names were probably called domain names because they wanted to describe the domain where this name has a meaning/is relevant/located

Since we don’t even try to make sure (how could we) that the name has anything to do with the content of the site/the creator/the language/location of the service its basically just human readable abbreviations for the longer data id that it represents… (But not limited to websites… I guess I can create a public name for my safecoin wallet address too? Latest at application layer I probably can… I would actually like to tell people my safecoin address is rids.wallet ) so the naming system might be used for all kinds of stuff

Edit/Ps: global network alias?
(in contrast to the potentially existing petname system - having been reminded of this possibility by @bzee s post )

A better word would be ‘global’. This is how Marc Stiegler refers to the property of Zooko’s triangle (originally called ‘distributed’).

The above is interesting thought material, by the way. According to the triangle, a global name can not be both memorable and secure. Though memorable one might confuse ‘Bill’, ‘bill’, ‘b1ll’, ‘biII’ (capital I); meaning they are not secure. When limiting the character set (e.g. base32) it might be secure, but not memorable. In the case of SAFE, public names are global (distributed), insecure (not securely unique) and memorable (human-readable).


SID was from the UK UFO series in the ?70’s. It was a AI satellite detecting the UFOs

OK it has to be an alternative to domain name since we do not have domains in SAFE. Its a level playing field

Yes it is a mistake. Which is why something like NRS - Name resolution system is better because it describes what is being done and that is resolving a name to an actual XOR address.

Not many people have AIDs, maybe some executives and politicians have them and some may have the condition AIDs.

But a better is Name Resolution because that is what it is doing. Global does not cover my private local system

1 Like

@JimCollinson was pointing out that ‘public’ didn’t quite fit the property it is supposed to describe. I think ‘global’ is the best word for that property. This resolution system isn’t just about the local system, so I’m not sure I understand your second part.