- From: Dave Longley <dlongley@digitalbazaar.com>
- Date: Mon, 13 Jun 2016 14:41:32 -0400
- To: David Chadwick <d.w.chadwick@kent.ac.uk>, W3C Credentials Community Group <public-credentials@w3.org>
On 06/12/2016 04:32 PM, David Chadwick wrote: > I believe the latest definition of claim in the architecture > document > > http://w3c.github.io/webpayments-ig/VCTF/architecture/ > > is fundamentally wrong. It says > > Claim A statement made by an entity about a subject. For example: > "Jane is a doctor." > > The example is not one claim, but two claims. It claims that the > subject is a doctor and that the subject is called Jane. We should > rewrite this to say > > Claim A statement made by an entity about a holder. For example: > "The holder is a doctor." > +1 ... the terminology is being cleaned up in all of these documents in general at present and you are correct about the need to this fix here. Looks like we'd want to use "subject" instead of "holder" here, however (which will also be brought in line elsewhere). -- Dave Longley CTO Digital Bazaar, Inc. http://digitalbazaar.com
Received on Monday, 13 June 2016 18:41:56 UTC