Re: Renaming Object Capabilities to Authorization Capabilities?

+1/2

I like changing it, but I would suggest Authorized Capabilities.

First, it's easier to say.

Second, it states the actual function more clearly: if you have an
authorized capability, you're authorized. If you have a zCap, you're
authorized. Or, in the inevitable vernacular, if you have a capability,
you're authorized.
"Authorization Capability" reads to me as if the holder has the
capability to authorize--which is only true if its delegatable and not
true in the generalized case.
Bikeshed on...

-j


On Sat, Nov 3, 2018, at 9:40 AM, Darrell O'Donnell wrote:
> +1
> 
> 
> *Darrell O'Donnell, P.Eng.*
> darrell.odonnell@continuumloop.com


> 
> 
> 
> On Sat, Nov 3, 2018 at 12:24 PM Brent Zundel
> <brent.zundel@evernym.com> wrote:>> +1
>> 
>> On Sat, Nov 3, 2018, 10:14 Jordan, John CITZ:EX
>> <John.Jordan@gov.bc.ca wrote:>>> +1
>>> 
>>>  > On Nov 3, 2018, at 08:27, Manu Sporny
>>>  > <msporny@digitalbazaar..com[1]> wrote:>>>  > 
>>>  > Hi all,
>>>  > 
>>>  > This is related to the OCAP-LD spec that some of us are working
>>>  > on in>>>  > this community:
>>>  > 
>>>  > https://w3c-ccg.github.io/ocap-ld/
>>>  > 
>>>  > Digital Bazaar's engagement with customers over the past several
>>>  > months>>>  > wrt. the term "Object Capabilities" has resulted in confusion
>>>  > around>>>  > exactly what an Object Capability is.
>>>  > 
>>>  > Some history -- the "Object Capabilities" name was originally
>>>  > picked to>>>  > differentiate from the "Linux Capabilities" stuff, which really
>>>  > didn't>>>  > have much to do with capabilities (in the authorization sense).
>>>  > Object>>>  > Capabilities makes more sense when you're talking about
>>>  > programming>>>  > languages, but we don't really use it in that sense in this
>>>  > community.>>>  > 
>>>  > I propose we name the specification more appropriately in the
>>>  > hope that>>>  > the name evokes what we're actually doing with the specification.
>>>  > The>>>  > technology we're developing in this community specifically has
>>>  > to do>>>  > with Authorization... capability-based authorization. Thus, I'm
>>>  > suggesting the spec is renamed to "Authorization Capabilities"...>>>  > shortened to "zCaps" for the cool kids in the community.
>>>  > 
>>>  > Also, this is a bike shed discussion, so I fully expect it to get
>>>  > out of>>>  > hand and for us to have to do a poll like we did for the
>>>  > Verifiable>>>  > Credentials terminology. Please only suggest names that you're
>>>  > committed>>>  > to using with your customers (or that you would use with non-
>>>  > technical>>>  > folks). If we get a bunch of +1s with no strong objections, we're>>>  > done... and yes, I know that's wishful thinking. :)
>>>  > 
>>>  > -- manu
>>>  > 
>>>  > -- 
>>>  > Manu Sporny (skype: msporny, twitter: manusporny, G+: +Manu
>>>  > Sporny)>>>  > Founder/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc.
>>>  > blog: Veres One Decentralized Identifier Blockchain Launches
>>>  > https://tinyurl.com/veres-one-launches
>>>  > 
>>> 

--
Joe Andrieu, PMP
joe@legreq.comLEGENDARY REQUIREMENTS
+1(805)705-8651Do what matters.
http://legreq.com[2]


Links:

  1. mailto:msporny@digitalbazaar.com
  2. http://www.legendaryrequirements.com