Conversation
f2b12e9 to
e9e7b18
Compare
972a305 to
9e38eba
Compare
3359c73 to
0a56139
Compare
ea1657c to
1730d4c
Compare
|
I believe this to be ready for another round of review. All changes I’ve applied are in a second commit that I intend to be squashed before merging. In summary, I’ve responded to all above feedback as noted in replies, but particularly:
|
1730d4c to
64b464e
Compare
|
I’ve posted a subsequent commit that clarifies the various pass invariants and makes them explicit for every model type. I’ve also factored out the JSON invariants and referenced them for the two applicable caveats for Null and Float64. I also used the tentative aspirational example for marked targets in JavaScript, such that they can handle all deliveries, although this is not consistent with Endo’s implementation yet. For @erights consideration in particular. |
gibson042
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Mostly editorial suggestions, including phrasing, typo fixes, and Markdown rendering improvements. Note also the general pattern that generated heading ids include all alphabetic text content (e.g., # Reference (Capability) corresponds with slug "#reference-capability" rather than "#reference").
erights
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Everything else still looks good enough to me, but I went back to "Request changes" because of the aspirational representation choice shown for a JS target, which I doubt is close to anything we'll actually want to do. Suggest discussing this at Endo meeting on 11 December. But until then please show the representation we actually use.
3905326 to
59ca1cd
Compare
|
I’ve adopted editorial recommendations, merged Identity and Equality into Equality, and removed the example for JavaScript targets ('to be proposed') since the current implementation of Endo CapTP does not reflect an ability to receive arbitrary deliveries and so doesn’t make a good example. When we have a way for a target to handle arbitrary deliveries (where the first argument is not a selector), I intend to update. That will also provide a suitable basis for the |
|
Posted a fresh draft, now pending @tsyesika’s approval only. |
gibson042
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Just a few remaining nits.
Closes: #XXXX Refs: - ocapn/ocapn#125 - https://github.com/ocapn/ocapn/blob/28af626441da888c4a520309222e18266dd2f1f2/draft-specifications/Model.md - #2452 - Agoric/agoric-sdk#10084 - https://github.com/tc39/proposal-immutable-arraybuffer - #2414 ## Description Revise Smallcaps cheatsheet to track OCapn as of ocapn/ocapn#125 ### Security Considerations none ### Scaling Considerations none ### Documentation Considerations the point. The cheatsheet was becoming too stale. ### Testing Considerations none ### Compatibility Considerations none ### Upgrade Considerations none
Closes: #92
28af626 to
871a40c
Compare
Closes #92 by migrating (and lightly editing) the abstract data model consensus positions from the wiki into the draft specifications.