Re: Renaming Object Capabilities to Authorization Capabilities?

Bikeshed with international slant ...

ZedCaps as opposed to ZeeCaps

:)



On Nov 3, 2018, at 16:04, =Drummond Reed <drummond.reed@evernym.com<mailto:drummond.reed@evernym.com>> wrote:

+1 to changing from "object capabilities" and o-cap to something that reflects authorization.

Now, on to the bikeshedding (which itself is one of my favorite terms in tech ;-)

  *   I really like the way "zCaps" sounds—it's catchy—and although I agree with Christopher that it sounds like zero-knowledge...I suspect that zCaps might only be used with insiders who know the Z stands for authorization.
  *   I'm truly torn between "Authorization Capabilities" and "Authorized Capabilities" because, as I understand the way capabilities work, those who have been authorized (delegated) may also authorize (delegate) further.

I could live with any of these—they are all improvements.

(BTW, this reminds me of why the Sovrin Foundation recently switched terms from "trust frameworks" to "governance frameworks"—we discovered the latter was more intuitive and easier for non-insiders to understand.)

On Sat, Nov 3, 2018 at 2:42 PM, Christopher Lemmer Webber <cwebber@dustycloud.org<mailto:cwebber@dustycloud.org>> wrote:
Christopher Allen writes:

> On Sat, Nov 3, 2018 at 4:27 PM Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com<mailto:msporny@digitalbazaar.com>>
> wrote:
>
>> shortened to "zCaps" for the cool kids in the community.
>>
>
> I am -1 for zCaps as a short. Adding z to things lately has been marketing
> speak for zero-knowledge, which ocap is not. And over hyped.
>
> -- Christopher Allen

FWIW, the name "zcap" was inspired by Alan Karp's use of "ZBAC" as a
term (intentionally contrasted to RBAC) to inform companies that didn't
understand what ocaps were or what domain they might want to apply them
to.

Received on Sunday, 4 November 2018 00:14:32 UTC