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

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

From: Steven Rowat <steven_rowat@sunshine.net>
Date: Thu, 8 Nov 2018 16:02:54 -0800
To: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>, Mark Miller <erights@gmail.com>
Cc: "W3C Credentials CG (Public List)" <public-credentials@w3.org>
Message-ID: <ac239be3-b1ac-aceb-a589-cf6f4e7ea280@sunshine.net>
On 2018-11-08 2:38 PM, Manu Sporny wrote:
> 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"?

Which to me also suggests the possibility of OCAP-DID   ?

Steven Rowat
Received on Friday, 9 November 2018 00:03:36 UTC

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