←back to thread

314 points Bogdanp | 9 comments | | HN request time: 1.219s | source | bottom
1. foresto ◴[] No.44381451[source]
I expect SAN in this case means Subject Alternative Name, not Storage Area Network.

Sigh... I wish people would use their words before trotting out possibly-ambiguous (or obscure) acronyms. It would help avoid confusion among readers who don't live and breathe the topic on the writer's mind.

replies(2): >>44381467 #>>44381501 #
2. parliament32 ◴[] No.44381467[source]
If you don't know how to interpret "SAN" in a blog post from a TLS certificate issuer, I don't think you're the target audience for this post.
replies(3): >>44381574 #>>44381682 #>>44382005 #
3. Operyl ◴[] No.44381501[source]
There’s only one, and not really obscure, interpretation of this acronym in a technical forum post announcement from a TLS certificate authority, the context was sufficient.
4. NewJazz ◴[] No.44381574[source]
OK, but how hard is a link to Wikipedia?
replies(1): >>44386504 #
5. foresto ◴[] No.44381682[source]
Lots of people on HN are not the target audience for any given post, yet are still interested.

(And my point applies to all writing and speaking, not just this post.)

replies(1): >>44382395 #
6. XorNot ◴[] No.44382005[source]
It's standard academic writing practice to introduce the full acronym on first usage in any given text.

Way more people should be familiar with the concept since it's very useful and ensures clear communications.

7. mcpherrinm ◴[] No.44382395{3}[source]
If it was a blog post or announcement, we’d have surely included more context, and not a forum post really intended for limited distribution.

You just used HN without expanding that acronym! :)

8. arccy ◴[] No.44386504{3}[source]
please expand the abbreviation "OK"
replies(1): >>44388163 #
9. NewJazz ◴[] No.44388163{4}[source]
Okay