Re: Updated data model specification document

Thanks Steven.  With the exception of 'TBD Credential', I think most of the confusion you describe is coming from the fact that the terms used are not all linked clearly and correctly.  This is a big item on my existing ToDo list.  It's compounded by the fact that we import definitions from another document that are then conflicting with definitions within the document.

How about this:  when I think the references and definitions are all fixed I will ping you to look again.  Then we can see what else needs to be done.


-- dan

> On May 26, 2016, at 3:04 PM, Steven Rowat <steven_rowat@sunshine.net> wrote:
> 
>> On 5/26/16 7:52 AM, Daniel Burnett wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> On Wed, May 25, 2016 at 12:41 AM, Steven Rowat
>> <steven_rowat@sunshine.net <mailto:steven_rowat@sunshine.net>> wrote:
> ...>     In section 3.1, I became hopelessly confused.
>> 
>>    At first I was just confused, but I came back and tried that
>>    section again a few hours later, and now it's hopeless.  ;-) .
>> 
>> 
>> I'm sorry to hear that.  Feel free to ask questions or make suggestions :)
> 
> Right. I thought of that. :-)
> But didn't know how to ask about that paragraph, which is:
> 
> "Both identities and claims, including verifiable claims, consist of a collection of name-value pairs which will be referred to as <b> properties </b> in this document. The following subsections describe the required and optional properties for both. The link between the two is in the id property. An Identity data set defines the identifier given in the id property, while a Claim data set, referred to as a TBD Credential, uses the id property to refer to the Identity data set that defines the given id value."
> 
> The final sentence in particular stumped me both times.
> 
> I think my problems might be at different meta-levels; I'll call them A and B.
> 
> A. I think this entire document is probably intended for specialists in the languages the data will be expressed in, and as such I'm not an appropriate reader. I was fooled, perhaps, by the plain language of the Abstract, which I think could be appreciated by almost anyone.
> 
> B. However, I think it's also possible that my confusion is contributed-to by these things:
> 
> i. "TBD Credentials", which is perhaps unavoidable but makes a peculiar stumble in my mind each time I hit it.
> 
> ii. The use of "properties" confused me. I think I'm unable to model in my head where this fits. This sentence in section 3.2 about properties didn't help:
> 
> "Unlike with claims, the properties in an Identity are merely properties that, together with an identifier id, constitute an identity. The properties are not claims and are not intended to be verifiable."
> 
> Is properties an official term, in the sense that it's the child or parent of some other term? It only appears in descriptions, not in the lists of terms. Yet it's bolded at the first insertion, like the other defined terms that are listed (id, type, signature, etc.). Is "properties" the parent of those other terms?
> 
> iii. That final sentence I referred to above: "An Identity data set defines the identifier given in the id property, while a Claim data set, referred to as a TBD Credential, uses the id property to refer to the Identity data set that defines the given id value."
> 
> My problems with this were/are something along the lines of...
>  What is an 'Identity data set"? Is that the same thing as "a collection of name-value pairs which will be referred to as properties in this document", which you said in the previous sentence? If so, I think you need to make this explicit, not assumed. Especially since in the final sentence you've got 'id', 'Identifier' and 'Identity' all used. Keeping those straight in my mind...didn't happen, and probably won't unless I get a clear and simple definition for each term before they're all used together.  :-)
> 
> Steven
>

Received on Friday, 27 May 2016 10:21:05 UTC