Rework the target to be a root capability and rename capabilityGrant to capabilityDelegate #18
Conversation
Part of #13. One more bit to doin reworking some text though.
…an ocap. - Remove all references of invocationTarget, replacing with parentCapability property or simply the concept of the target. - Also rework invocation explaination to be accurate to this new text and clearer. - Replace last reference of capabilityGrant with capabilityDelegate. Closes #14 and #13.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Mostly minor nits... one question about language tense used in proofPurpose... suggesting we use words ending in "tion"... words used to indicate an action is being taken, which is what an inovcation is. The other "proofPurpose" suggestion would be "capabilityInvocation" (instead of delegation)?
index.html
Outdated
| "proof": { | ||
| "type": "RsaSignature2016", | ||
| "proofPurpose": "capabilityGrant", | ||
| "proofPurpose": "capabilityDelegate", |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Why not capabilityDelegation?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I have no problem with that. I'll update it.
index.html
Outdated
| @@ -421,6 +421,12 @@ <h2>Terminology</h2> | |||
| (linked data) object. | |||
| </dd> | |||
|
|
|||
| <dt>target</dt> | |||
| <dd> | |||
| The entity that a capability, upon being invoked, permits the authority | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This language feels more complex than it needs to be. Why not "The entity that will be acted upon when the capability is invoked." ?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Sounds good, will update.
index.html
Outdated
| <p> | ||
| Every capability document MUST have: | ||
| Every capability document, excepting the target, MUST have: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
"excepting"? or "except for" ... suggest using simpler language.
index.html
Outdated
| <!-- TODO: Should this be by any of the authentication material which | ||
| has authority to use this capability, or only the nearest | ||
| invoker on the chain? --> | ||
| </li> | ||
| </ul> | ||
|
|
||
| <p> | ||
| "Top-level" capabilities, which do not have a | ||
| <code>parentCapability</code> property, MUST have: | ||
| Every capability document, excepting the target, MAY have: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
suggest changing "excepting" to "except for"...
| @@ -421,6 +421,11 @@ <h2>Terminology</h2> | |||
| (linked data) object. | |||
| </dd> | |||
|
|
|||
| <dt>target</dt> | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Why was this renamed from "invocationTarget" to just "target"? I think it's more likely to conflict with other vocabularies making plain JSON implementations more difficult.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
There is no invocationTarget or any such target property anymore: since the target is the root capability, we now use parentCapability to point to it. So this just refers to the concept of a target, not a target property.
Maybe there's a way to make that clearer? What do you think?
These turned out to be somewhat intertwined so done in one pass but across two commits.