Glossary Terms #117
Glossary Terms #117
Conversation
Signed-off-by: Darrell O'Donnell <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Darrell O'Donnell <[email protected]>
spec/appendix.md
Outdated
| ### Trust Over IP Glossary - Controlled Terms | ||
|
|
||
| NOTE: | ||
| * The following set of identifiers are from the current [ToIP Glossary](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1fZByfuSOwszDRkE7ARQLeElSYmVznoOyJK4sxRvJpyM/edit?usp=sharing) (Google Doc). These definitions need to be moved over to the (under development) ToIP Terms tool (aka TEv2). |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It’s not clear what definitions “need to be moved” — the ones in this spec or the ones in the ToIP Glossary. I think you mean that the “ToIP Glossary definitions are being moved to the (under development) ToIP Terms tool (aka TEv2).
Suggest you clarify.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
That's going to be an ongoing effort as we edit this (and other specs).
There was a problem hiding this comment.
relates to this Issue: #116
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@darrellodonnell I believe this should be moved out into a separate issue and PR (its basically a TODO)
spec/appendix.md
Outdated
|
|
||
| NOTE: | ||
| * The following set of identifiers are from the current [ToIP Glossary](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1fZByfuSOwszDRkE7ARQLeElSYmVznoOyJK4sxRvJpyM/edit?usp=sharing) (Google Doc). These definitions need to be moved over to the (under development) ToIP Terms tool (aka TEv2). | ||
| * TODO: not all ToIP definitions are fully linked here. This whole section is more of an exemplar as of the time of writing. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Presumably you mean “not all the relevant ToIP definitions…”. Presumably, the ToIP Glossary is much bigger than this.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@darrellodonnell I believe this TODO line should be removed. The addition of any other terms can be included in a future PR.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
noted - I have made edits to remove the NOTE as well as removed a few definitions that go too far (i.e. really belong in an external glossary). Added issue to GH as well: #121
update coming shortly
Signed-off-by: Darrell O'Donnell <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Darrell O'Donnell <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Darrell O'Donnell <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Darrell O'Donnell <[email protected]>
package-lock.json
Outdated
| @@ -38,6 +38,7 @@ | |||
| "merge-stream": "2.0.0", | |||
| "pkg-dir": "4.2.0", | |||
| "prismjs": ">=1.24.0", | |||
| "spec-up": "^0.10.6", | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@darrellodonnell this is what i referred to in the slack message
package-lock.json
Outdated
| @@ -3567,6 +3568,43 @@ | |||
| "resolved": "https://registry.npmjs.org/spdx-license-ids/-/spdx-license-ids-3.0.11.tgz", | |||
| "integrity": "sha512-Ctl2BrFiM0X3MANYgj3CkygxhRmr9mi6xhejbdO960nF6EDJApTYpn0BQnDKlnNBULKiCN1n3w9EBkHK8ZWg+g==" | |||
| }, | |||
| "node_modules/spec-up": { | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
ok - removed these (unnecessary) changes to package-lock.json.
Signed-off-by: Darrell O'Donnell <[email protected]>
spec/appendix.md
Outdated
| ### Trust Over IP Glossary - Controlled Terms | ||
|
|
||
| NOTE: | ||
| * The following set of identifiers are from the current [ToIP Glossary](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1fZByfuSOwszDRkE7ARQLeElSYmVznoOyJK4sxRvJpyM/edit?usp=sharing) (Google Doc). These definitions need to be moved over to the (under development) ToIP Terms tool (aka TEv2). |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@darrellodonnell I believe this should be moved out into a separate issue and PR (its basically a TODO)
spec/appendix.md
Outdated
|
|
||
| NOTE: | ||
| * The following set of identifiers are from the current [ToIP Glossary](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1fZByfuSOwszDRkE7ARQLeElSYmVznoOyJK4sxRvJpyM/edit?usp=sharing) (Google Doc). These definitions need to be moved over to the (under development) ToIP Terms tool (aka TEv2). | ||
| * TODO: not all ToIP definitions are fully linked here. This whole section is more of an exemplar as of the time of writing. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@darrellodonnell I believe this TODO line should be removed. The addition of any other terms can be included in a future PR.
Signed-off-by: Darrell O'Donnell <[email protected]>
spec/appendix.md
Outdated
| ~ A single attribute—typically a character string—that uniquely identifies an entity within a specific context (which may be a global context). Examples include the name of a party, the URL of an organization, or a serial number for a man-made thing. Supporting definitions: eSSIF-Lab: a character string that is being used for the identification of some entity (yet may refer to 0, 1, or more entities, depending on the context within which it is being used). | ||
|
|
||
| [[def: self-certifying identifier (SCID), SCID, SCIDs]] | ||
| ~ A subclass of verifiable identifier ([[ref: VID]]) that is [[def: cryptographically verifiable]] without the need to rely on any [[ref: third party]] for [[ref: verification]] because the [[ref: identifier]] is cryptographically bound to the [[ref: cryptographic keys]] from which it was generated. Also known as: [[ref: autonomous identifier]]. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think the [[def: crypto…] should be a a [[ref: …], correct?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
good catch. Caused me to remove a few of the refs that I had removed defs for (e.g. third party, verification). change committed.
Signed-off-by: Darrell O'Donnell <[email protected]>
I am working to get some closure on definitions and terms that should help simplify a few things. The work is not complete, but this PR starts aims to show what needs to be done (and completes a few things).
One item that popped up as a surprise was that
spec-upwas added topackage.jsonandpackage-lock.json. I think that is ok, but I was surprised that it wasn't already there. I suppose nobody is doing builds locally.