ARAP: use the defined term for the bound Context - #692
Open
vatsalgupta wants to merge 1 commit into
Open
vatsalgupta wants to merge 1 commit into
vatsalgupta wants to merge 1 commit into
Conversation
Five rules said "relevant Context" where they mean the defined term Authorization-Relevant Context: the PEP preservation rule, the PDP approval-binding and applicability rules, the alternative-format verification rule, and the Bulk profile's default approval scope. Use the defined term in each. The meaning of each rule is unchanged. Refs openid#662
This branch has not been deployed
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Five rules said "relevant Context" where they mean the defined term Authorization-Relevant Context:
This uses the defined term in each. The meaning of each rule is unchanged. The other naming and force questions in #662 are left to that issue.
Refs #662