Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Endorser / Endorsement optional optimization? #158

Closed
laurencelundblade opened this issue Oct 9, 2020 · 2 comments
Closed

Endorser / Endorsement optional optimization? #158

laurencelundblade opened this issue Oct 9, 2020 · 2 comments
Labels
wontfix Should respond via email but does not warrant doc changes

Comments

@laurencelundblade
Copy link
Contributor

Dave pretty clearly thinks of Endorsements and the Endorser as an optional optimization in an attestation deployment. Also, the Endorser is an Entity like a Verifier Owner, not a Role, like a Verifier. Most of the text in the document is consistent with this. For example, it says "...help Verifier...".

The other messages in the document, the Attestation Evidence and Attestation Result, are not optional, though Attestation Result can be a bit virtual when Verifier and RP are the same Entity. We don't say clearly that Endorsements are optional. Probably we should say so (if we really do agree they are optional).

Personally, I think it is confusing that Endorser and Endorsements, that are optional helper optimizations, are featured so prominently in Figure 1.

@nedmsmith
Copy link
Collaborator

Creation of 'reference value provider' and cleanup that qualifies these as roles performed by an entity seems to clarify the concerns raised.

@nedmsmith nedmsmith added the wontfix Should respond via email but does not warrant doc changes label Feb 2, 2021
@mcr
Copy link
Collaborator

mcr commented Feb 5, 2021

@mcr mcr closed this as completed Feb 5, 2021
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
wontfix Should respond via email but does not warrant doc changes
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants