Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

PR 107 Confusing text #144

Closed
yogeshbdeshpande opened this issue Sep 7, 2023 · 5 comments
Closed

PR 107 Confusing text #144

yogeshbdeshpande opened this issue Sep 7, 2023 · 5 comments

Comments

@yogeshbdeshpande
Copy link
Collaborator

in Pull Request:
#107

The following text is ambigous

A Reference Value consists of an environment-map plus a measurement-map. In the
reference-values-triple-record these are packaged together. In other triples multiple
Reference Values are represented more compactly by letting one environment-map
apply to multiple measurement-maps.

Need to re-write the same.

@thomas-fossati
Copy link
Collaborator

Can the issue description point out the exact ambiguity we want to address? I guess in a couple of weeks all the cached context which now looks evident will be lost and we'll be left wondering what we meant and what needs doing...

@yogeshbdeshpande
Copy link
Collaborator Author

yogeshbdeshpande commented Sep 7, 2023

The issue is the text above intends to describe how Verifier internally should collect all the measurements pertaining to the same environment coming from a sea of triples from multiple CoRIMs.

However the text above indicates the opposite!

@nedmsmith
Copy link
Collaborator

Within the grouping context, the Verifier uses the environment fields in the ACS to locate relevant RVs. The environment fields in RVs must exactly match the environment fields in the ACS.

The measurement fields in matching RVs, within the grouping context, are matched with measurement fields in the ACS. All RV measurement fields MUST match an ACS measurement field. Otherwise, matching (within the grouping context) fails.

Note: when grouping context is resolved, this text can be updated.

@andrew-draper
Copy link
Collaborator

The text mentioned at the start of this issue has been replaced as part of PR #193.

Is it ok to close this issue?

@yogeshbdeshpande
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Closing as Andy has addressed this using PR #193

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants