W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-credentials@w3.org > November 2018

Re: STRONG -1 to "authorized capabilities", and let's consider renaming costs

From: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
Date: Thu, 8 Nov 2018 17:38:26 -0500
To: Mark Miller <erights@gmail.com>
Cc: "W3C Credentials CG (Public List)" <public-credentials@w3.org>
Message-ID: <dc70e325-9e11-5ec4-5100-4a881935ca64@digitalbazaar.com>
On 11/8/18 11:42 AM, Mark Miller wrote:
> If you mean something other than what we mean by 
> "object-capabilities", by all means, *please* use a different name 
> rather than dilute the meaning of "object-capabilities".

Would you be opposed to naming a specific subset of "object-capabilities"?

For example, the currently named OCAP-LD specification is a
certificate-based system that kinda sorta separates designation from
authority and is used almost purely in decentralized systems. It's still
part of the "object-capabilities" ecosystem.

So, would you be opposed to something like "Decentralized Capabilities",
which are a sub set of the broader "object-capabilities" space like what
was done for "Reference Capabilities"?

-- 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
Received on Thursday, 8 November 2018 22:38:52 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thursday, 24 March 2022 20:24:50 UTC