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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

Producer definition #669

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Mar 31, 2022
Merged

Producer definition #669

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
1 commit
Select commit
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
6 changes: 6 additions & 0 deletions index.html
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -589,6 +589,12 @@ <h1>Terminology</h1>
system. Ideally such data is stored in a separate memory inaccessible to the application
and is only used via abstract operations, such as signing, that do not reveal the secret
information even to the application using it.</dd>
<dt>
<dfn>Producer</dfn>
</dt>
<dd>An entity that can create WoT Thing Descriptions
for a specific Thing.</dd>
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Is this a limitation?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This exactly corresponds to the term "Generator" that I proposed in my comment. I'm ok with "Producer" under this specific definition, however. As long as we are clear that "Exposer != Provider != Producer", since these might all be separate entities.

<dt>
<dt>
<dfn>Property</dfn>
</dt>
Expand Down