Re: *-forms in tags

[azb@llnl.gov (Tony Bartoletti)]

Ron wrote:
>From the point of view of the fellow who wrote the tag field
>       (for tie pants socks belt shirt)
>he's happy, since the resulting certificate had exactly this field.
>
>From the point of view of the fellow who wrote the tag field
>       (* reorder-insert (for socks shirt pants))
>he's happy, since he is explicitly granting permission to add new
>elements to this list. (I.e. he doesn't care, as long as at least
>sock, shirts, and pants are bought.)
>
>So, everyone is happy...  Are you now??

Define "happy" ;-)

Strictly speaking, authority was not expanded because "* reorder-insert"
explicitly grants list extension.  OK.  Seems one should be very careful
with this one.  I take it we allow:

[root-of-delegation] says

        (tag springcleaning
                (* reorder-insert (takeout trash recyclables)))

[delegatee] may then say

        (tag springcleaning
                (takeout trash recyclables stereo jewelry))

___TONY___

---

• Prev by Date: Re: Tags removing permissions
• Next by Date: [franco@goldnet.ch: Tags removing permissions]
• Prev by thread: *-forms in tags
• Next by thread: Re: *-forms in tags
• Index(es):
  • Main
  • Thread