Hi, Thomas Lord <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> A symmetric topic arose recently in the Scheme world > in the context of something called "SRFI-84". > > Here is my reply: > > http://dasht-brk.livejournal.com/23779.html?mode=reply Tom: I really like your answer, I find it enlightening, and I agree with your griefs against reliance on global, uncontrolled, names. The proposal at the end of your reply reminds me of SPKI/SDSI's name spaces, described at the beginning of: Clarke et al, ``Certificate Chain Discovery in SPKI/SDSI'', 2001, http://theory.lcs.mit.edu/~rivest/ClarkeElElFrMoRi-CertificateChainDiscoveryInSPKISDSI.ps The idea, roughly, is that each one can have identifiers in their local name that may be bound either to a name in another person's name space, or to some value (actually, a public key). Such a binding is called a ``name'', precisely. Everyone can issue ``name certificates'' for their local bindings, that is, cryptographically-signed descriptions of the bindings. Thanks, Ludovic. _______________________________________________ Gnu-arch-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-arch-users GNU arch home page: http://savannah.gnu.org/projects/gnu-arch/
