Date   

Re: i'm still puzzled as to why some doc .md files link to html files

Chris <alaskadd@...>
 

I ran into that problem this weekend trying to insert links from the network.md file to the glossary.rst file. You can refer to the document by: glossary.html, but you cannot target specific anchor tags to link to specific sections in the glossary that I was able to figure out. If someone knows a convention for doing this, please advise.

Chris G.

On May 21, 2018, at 6:15 AM, "rpjday@..." <rpjday@...> wrote:

On Mon, 21 May 2018, Christopher Ferris wrote:

because you cannot refer to a .rst from a .md because the suffix
will be changed to .html
ah, got it.

rday



Re: i'm still puzzled as to why some doc .md files link to html files

rpjday@crashcourse.ca <rpjday@...>
 

On Mon, 21 May 2018, Christopher Ferris wrote:

because you cannot refer to a .rst from a .md because the suffix
will be changed to .html
ah, got it.

rday


Re: i'm still puzzled as to why some doc .md files link to html files

Christopher Ferris
 

because you cannot refer to a .rst from a .md because the suffix will be
changed to .html

Chris

On Sun, May 20, 2018 at 7:20 AM, rpjday@... <rpjday@...> wrote:

  i asked about this once upon a time, but i'm still puzzled as to why
the actual source of some markdown files contain links/references
explicitly to html files. consider this example in
membership/membership.md:

If you've read through the documentation on [identity](../identity/identity.html)

as long as you're generating HTML, i'm sure that works fine, but what
if i choose to generate PDF? shouldn't references like that always
refer to the raw source file (.md, .rst, whatever) rather than the
output format that one simply *assumes* will be generated?

rday





Re: more weird phrasing in "ledger.md"

Mohammad Ghasletwala
 

The JOURNAL and LEDGER when used in financial system have different meaning.
But in general terms LEDGER means a book of entries where once entry is written with pen u cannot really update it. Isn't it?

Regards,
Mohammad Ghasletwala | Tech. Soln. Arch. | Blockchain COE Lead
mohammad.ghasletwala@... | o. +91 206.709.5600
NTT DATA Services | nttdataservices.com | @nttdataservices
Consulting | Industry Solutions | Digital | Cloud | Application, Infrastructure & BPO Services

NTT DATA Global Delivery Services Pvt. Ltd.

Disclaimer: This email and any attachments are sent in strictest confidence for the sole use of the addressee and may contain legally privileged,confidential, and proprietary data. If you are not the intended recipient,please advise the sender by replying promptly to this email and then delete and destroy this email and any attachments without any further use, copying or forwarding.


Re: One Question of the HistoryDB module in fabric version v1.10

??? <wangzhipengxlj@...>
 

So I suggest to change the note, It is easy to misunderstand.


Re: stupid question -- is "chaincode" singular or plural?

Baohua Yang
 

IMHO, if we can distinguish the term of "smart contract" and "chaincode", it might be easier to define the context.

I.e., smart contract can be some electronic code for a specific purpose (e.g., transfer money, shipment), which can include multiple chaincodes as implementation.

On Sun, May 20, 2018 at 5:19 PM, Christopher Ferris <chris.ferris@...> wrote:
Smart contracts are neither... discuss.

I also hate “chaincode”, in any plurality but, its what we have.

I guess that maybe we should have a conversation about this... it is getting to be more effort than it is worth to argue over how to precisely handle a term used no where else.

Sigh

Chris

On May 20, 2018, at 1:11 AM, Kim Letkeman <kletkema@...> wrote:

Consider: https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/20455/is-it-wrong-to-use-the-word-codes-in-a-programming-context

The accepted answer (with which I agree completely) is:

As a programmer, I cringe when hearing this!
In computer science, "code" is used as a mass noun, specifying the collection of instructions in a specific arrangement as a whole and in no specific quantity. Whether it's one line of code or ten pages, it is still referred to as code, not codes.
When "codes" is used in computer science, it typically refers to values or constants used to specify a trait, access or properties, though in my experience, the actual name of those types of items is used over the word "codes".

Another clarification in that thread is:

Code is used like sand: you can have 1, but you cannot say 1 code like you cannot say 1 sand. You can use more words to specify the amount: 1 line of code --> 1 grain of sand.

So what I am driving at is that the parallel plural use to "code" is "chaincode". But "smart contract" remains the better term for describing the logical content and *can* be pluralized for clarity, while chaincode describes only the physical content reasonably well. And often the logical term smart contract is still better in context when one is referring to the executing code.

Kim


Kim Letkeman
Senior Technical Staff Member, IBM Watson IoT

IoT Blockchain


Phone: +1 (613) 762-0352
E-mail:
kletkema@...


<graycol.gif>vipinsun---05/19/2018 09:34:30 PM---Singular and plural. Just like code. Sent from my iPhone

From: vipinsun@...
To: Kim Letkeman <kletkema@...>
Cc: "rpjday@..." <rpjday@...>, Hyperledger Fabric discussion list <hyperledger-fabric@lists.hyperledger.org>
Date: 05/19/2018 09:34 PM
Subject: Re: [Hyperledger Fabric] stupid question -- is "chaincode" singular or plural?




Singular and plural. Just like code.



On May 19, 2018, at 3:33 PM, Kim Letkeman <kletkema@...> wrote:
      Frankly, I have never liked "chaincode" as a term, because it appears to mean pretty much anything in the realm of a smart contract, the physical code implementing a smart contract, and the same code running in a container against a channel and a peer.

      I prefer to limit the term chaincode to mean (a) the development language and environment for smart contracts on Fabric, and (b) a physical manifestation of a smart contract. Thus, we have the chaincode interface (stub), the chaincode container, and the chaincode itself running in the container.

      The term I prefer to refer to smart contracts is ... well ... "smart contract", which pluralizes just fine.

      So a smart contract is pretty much self-defining, and a physical manifestation of a smart contract is a chaincode, but also just a smart contract. If the context is the Fabric development environment or the peer/channel operational environment, then chaincode is appropriate. If the context is an application or system role, then smart contract makes a lot more sense to me.

      But there definitely are no "chaincodes" in my opinion :-)

      Kim

Kim Letkeman
Senior Technical Staff Member, IBM Watson IoT

IoT Blockchain


Phone: +1 (613) 762-0352
E-mail:
kletkema@...


      <graycol.gif>"rpjday@crashcourse.ca" ---05/19/2018 05:43:30 AM--- yes, i am this nitpicky ... the docs seem to bounce around between treating the phrase "chaincode

      From:
      "rpjday@..." <rpjday@...>
      To:
      Hyperledger Fabric discussion list <hyperledger-fabric@lists.hyperledger.org>
      Date:
      05/19/2018 05:43 AM
      Subject:
      [Hyperledger Fabric] stupid question -- is "chaincode" singular or plural?
      Sent by:
      fabric@...





       yes, i am this nitpicky ... the docs seem to bounce around between
      treating the phrase "chaincode" as both singular and plural, depending
      on the context, in that there is frequent use of the word "chaincodes"
      suggesting *that* is how you refer to more than one.

      from peers.md:

      "We can see that it's the peer that hosts both the ledger and
      chaincode."

      from that, it's not precisely clear whether it's describing one smart
      contract, or more than one. thoughts? is there a need for more
      precision here?

      rday











--
Best wishes!

Baohua Yang


Re: stupid question -- is "chaincode" singular or plural?

vipinsun@...
 

Singular and plural. Just like code. 


On May 19, 2018, at 3:33 PM, Kim Letkeman <kletkema@...> wrote:

Frankly, I have never liked "chaincode" as a term, because it appears to mean pretty much anything in the realm of a smart contract, the physical code implementing a smart contract, and the same code running in a container against a channel and a peer.

I prefer to limit the term chaincode to mean (a) the development language and environment for smart contracts on Fabric, and (b) a physical manifestation of a smart contract. Thus, we have the chaincode interface (stub), the chaincode container, and the chaincode itself running in the container.

The term I prefer to refer to smart contracts is ... well ... "smart contract", which pluralizes just fine.

So a smart contract is pretty much self-defining, and a physical manifestation of a smart contract is a chaincode, but also just a smart contract. If the context is the Fabric development environment or the peer/channel operational environment, then chaincode is appropriate. If the context is an application or system role, then smart contract makes a lot more sense to me.

But there definitely are no "chaincodes" in my opinion :-)

Kim


Kim Letkeman
Senior Technical Staff Member, IBM Watson IoT

IoT Blockchain


Phone: +1 (613) 762-0352
E-mail:
kletkema@...


"rpjday@..." ---05/19/2018 05:43:30 AM--- yes, i am this nitpicky ... the docs seem to bounce around between treating the phrase "chaincode

From: "rpjday@..." <rpjday@...>
To: Hyperledger Fabric discussion list <hyperledger-fabric@...>
Date: 05/19/2018 05:43 AM
Subject: [Hyperledger Fabric] stupid question -- is "chaincode" singular or plural?
Sent by: fabric@...





  yes, i am this nitpicky ... the docs seem to bounce around between
treating the phrase "chaincode" as both singular and plural, depending
on the context, in that there is frequent use of the word "chaincodes"
suggesting *that* is how you refer to more than one.

 from peers.md:

 "We can see that it's the peer that hosts both the ledger and
 chaincode."

from that, it's not precisely clear whether it's describing one smart
contract, or more than one. thoughts? is there a need for more
precision here?

rday








i'm still puzzled as to why some doc .md files link to html files

rpjday@crashcourse.ca <rpjday@...>
 

i asked about this once upon a time, but i'm still puzzled as to why
the actual source of some markdown files contain links/references
explicitly to html files. consider this example in
membership/membership.md:

If you've read through the documentation on [identity](../identity/identity.html)

as long as you're generating HTML, i'm sure that works fine, but what
if i choose to generate PDF? shouldn't references like that always
refer to the raw source file (.md, .rst, whatever) rather than the
output format that one simply *assumes* will be generated?

rday


Re: stupid question -- is "chaincode" singular or plural?

Christopher Ferris
 

Smart contracts are neither... discuss.

I also hate “chaincode”, in any plurality but, its what we have.

I guess that maybe we should have a conversation about this... it is getting to be more effort than it is worth to argue over how to precisely handle a term used no where else.

Sigh

Chris

On May 20, 2018, at 1:11 AM, Kim Letkeman <kletkema@...> wrote:

Consider: https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/20455/is-it-wrong-to-use-the-word-codes-in-a-programming-context

The accepted answer (with which I agree completely) is:

As a programmer, I cringe when hearing this!
In computer science, "code" is used as a mass noun, specifying the collection of instructions in a specific arrangement as a whole and in no specific quantity. Whether it's one line of code or ten pages, it is still referred to as code, not codes.
When "codes" is used in computer science, it typically refers to values or constants used to specify a trait, access or properties, though in my experience, the actual name of those types of items is used over the word "codes".

Another clarification in that thread is:

Code is used like sand: you can have 1, but you cannot say 1 code like you cannot say 1 sand. You can use more words to specify the amount: 1 line of code --> 1 grain of sand.

So what I am driving at is that the parallel plural use to "code" is "chaincode". But "smart contract" remains the better term for describing the logical content and *can* be pluralized for clarity, while chaincode describes only the physical content reasonably well. And often the logical term smart contract is still better in context when one is referring to the executing code.

Kim


Kim Letkeman
Senior Technical Staff Member, IBM Watson IoT

IoT Blockchain


Phone: +1 (613) 762-0352
E-mail:
kletkema@...


<graycol.gif>vipinsun---05/19/2018 09:34:30 PM---Singular and plural. Just like code. Sent from my iPhone

From: vipinsun@...
To: Kim Letkeman <kletkema@...>
Cc: "rpjday@..." <rpjday@...>, Hyperledger Fabric discussion list <hyperledger-fabric@...>
Date: 05/19/2018 09:34 PM
Subject: Re: [Hyperledger Fabric] stupid question -- is "chaincode" singular or plural?




Singular and plural. Just like code.



On May 19, 2018, at 3:33 PM, Kim Letkeman <kletkema@...> wrote:
      Frankly, I have never liked "chaincode" as a term, because it appears to mean pretty much anything in the realm of a smart contract, the physical code implementing a smart contract, and the same code running in a container against a channel and a peer.

      I prefer to limit the term chaincode to mean (a) the development language and environment for smart contracts on Fabric, and (b) a physical manifestation of a smart contract. Thus, we have the chaincode interface (stub), the chaincode container, and the chaincode itself running in the container.

      The term I prefer to refer to smart contracts is ... well ... "smart contract", which pluralizes just fine.

      So a smart contract is pretty much self-defining, and a physical manifestation of a smart contract is a chaincode, but also just a smart contract. If the context is the Fabric development environment or the peer/channel operational environment, then chaincode is appropriate. If the context is an application or system role, then smart contract makes a lot more sense to me.

      But there definitely are no "chaincodes" in my opinion :-)

      Kim

Kim Letkeman
Senior Technical Staff Member, IBM Watson IoT

IoT Blockchain


Phone: +1 (613) 762-0352
E-mail:
kletkema@...


      <graycol.gif>"rpjday@..." ---05/19/2018 05:43:30 AM--- yes, i am this nitpicky ... the docs seem to bounce around between treating the phrase "chaincode

      From:
      "rpjday@..." <rpjday@...>
      To:
      Hyperledger Fabric discussion list <hyperledger-fabric@...>
      Date:
      05/19/2018 05:43 AM
      Subject:
      [Hyperledger Fabric] stupid question -- is "chaincode" singular or plural?
      Sent by:
      fabric@...





       yes, i am this nitpicky ... the docs seem to bounce around between
      treating the phrase "chaincode" as both singular and plural, depending
      on the context, in that there is frequent use of the word "chaincodes"
      suggesting *that* is how you refer to more than one.

      from peers.md:

      "We can see that it's the peer that hosts both the ledger and
      chaincode."

      from that, it's not precisely clear whether it's describing one smart
      contract, or more than one. thoughts? is there a need for more
      precision here?

      rday









Re: stupid question -- is "chaincode" singular or plural?

rpjday@crashcourse.ca <rpjday@...>
 

On Sun, 20 May 2018, Kim Letkeman wrote:

Consider: https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/20455/is-it-wrong-to-use-the-word-codes-in-a-programming-context
... snip ...

So what I am driving at is that the parallel plural use to "code" is
"chaincode". But "smart contract" remains the better term for
describing the logical content and *can* be pluralized for clarity,
while chaincode describes only the physical content reasonably well.
And often the logical term smart contract is still better in context
when one is referring to the executing code.
i was going to respond with something very much like this; now i
don't have to. :-) in short, one would say, "i wrote some code today"
-- one would never say, "i wrote some codes today."

how people might want to rethink the use of "chaincode" is something
way above my pay grade here.

rday


Re: stupid question -- is "chaincode" singular or plural?

Kim Letkeman <kletkema@...>
 

Consider: https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/20455/is-it-wrong-to-use-the-word-codes-in-a-programming-context

The accepted answer (with which I agree completely) is:

As a programmer, I cringe when hearing this!
In computer science, "code" is used as a mass noun, specifying the collection of instructions in a specific arrangement as a whole and in no specific quantity. Whether it's one line of code or ten pages, it is still referred to as code, not codes.
When "codes" is used in computer science, it typically refers to values or constants used to specify a trait, access or properties, though in my experience, the actual name of those types of items is used over the word "codes".

Another clarification in that thread is:

Code is used like sand: you can have 1, but you cannot say 1 code like you cannot say 1 sand. You can use more words to specify the amount: 1 line of code --> 1 grain of sand.

So what I am driving at is that the parallel plural use to "code" is "chaincode". But "smart contract" remains the better term for describing the logical content and *can* be pluralized for clarity, while chaincode describes only the physical content reasonably well. And often the logical term smart contract is still better in context when one is referring to the executing code.

Kim


Kim Letkeman
Senior Technical Staff Member, IBM Watson IoT

IoT Blockchain


Phone: +1 (613) 762-0352
E-mail:
kletkema@...


vipinsun---05/19/2018 09:34:30 PM---Singular and plural. Just like code. Sent from my iPhone

From: vipinsun@...
To: Kim Letkeman <kletkema@...>
Cc: "rpjday@..." <rpjday@...>, Hyperledger Fabric discussion list <hyperledger-fabric@...>
Date: 05/19/2018 09:34 PM
Subject: Re: [Hyperledger Fabric] stupid question -- is "chaincode" singular or plural?





Singular and plural. Just like code.



On May 19, 2018, at 3:33 PM, Kim Letkeman <kletkema@...> wrote:
      Frankly, I have never liked "chaincode" as a term, because it appears to mean pretty much anything in the realm of a smart contract, the physical code implementing a smart contract, and the same code running in a container against a channel and a peer.

      I prefer to limit the term chaincode to mean (a) the development language and environment for smart contracts on Fabric, and (b) a physical manifestation of a smart contract. Thus, we have the chaincode interface (stub), the chaincode container, and the chaincode itself running in the container.

      The term I prefer to refer to smart contracts is ... well ... "smart contract", which pluralizes just fine.

      So a smart contract is pretty much self-defining, and a physical manifestation of a smart contract is a chaincode, but also just a smart contract. If the context is the Fabric development environment or the peer/channel operational environment, then chaincode is appropriate. If the context is an application or system role, then smart contract makes a lot more sense to me.

      But there definitely are no "chaincodes" in my opinion :-)

      Kim

Kim Letkeman
Senior Technical Staff Member, IBM Watson IoT

IoT Blockchain


Phone: +1 (613) 762-0352
E-mail:
kletkema@...


      "rpjday@..." ---05/19/2018 05:43:30 AM--- yes, i am this nitpicky ... the docs seem to bounce around between treating the phrase "chaincode

      From:
      "rpjday@..." <rpjday@...>
      To:
      Hyperledger Fabric discussion list <hyperledger-fabric@...>
      Date:
      05/19/2018 05:43 AM
      Subject:
      [Hyperledger Fabric] stupid question -- is "chaincode" singular or plural?
      Sent by:
      fabric@...





       yes, i am this nitpicky ... the docs seem to bounce around between
      treating the phrase "chaincode" as both singular and plural, depending
      on the context, in that there is frequent use of the word "chaincodes"
      suggesting *that* is how you refer to more than one.

      from peers.md:

      "We can see that it's the peer that hosts both the ledger and
      chaincode."

      from that, it's not precisely clear whether it's describing one smart
      contract, or more than one. thoughts? is there a need for more
      precision here?

      rday









Re: more weird phrasing in "ledger.md"

Kim Letkeman <kletkema@...>
 

Now THAT is an excellent point! I worked on financial systems in the 80s (and in COBOL no less) and there was no confusion about the journal and the ledger ... you have reminded me that the separation has not vanished with the onslaught of "new ideas" :-)

Thanks for that ...

Kim


Kim Letkeman
Senior Technical Staff Member, IBM Watson IoT

IoT Blockchain


Phone: +1 (613) 762-0352
E-mail:
kletkema@...


Ben Taylor ---05/19/2018 08:20:46 PM---The two of you have both done a great job of providing clarity for the community. I know this is con

From: Ben Taylor <ben.taylor@...>
To: Kim Letkeman <kletkema@...>, "rpjday@..." <rpjday@...>
Cc: Hyperledger Fabric discussion list <hyperledger-fabric@...>
Date: 05/19/2018 08:20 PM
Subject: Re: [Hyperledger Fabric] more weird phrasing in "ledger.md"





The two of you have both done a great job of providing clarity for the community.

I know this is controversial but will throw it out there. The misuse of the term “ledger” is an original sin in the blockchain community.

The blockchain is the JOURNAL; the world state is the LEDGER.


On May 19, 2018, at 12:38 PM, Kim Letkeman <kletkema@...> wrote:
      Yeah, that sounds a little twisted.

      I describe world state as a set of key value pairs in a peer's database with keys being asset identifiers (or related identifiers) and the values being *current* state for that key. World state is partitioned by channel, then by smart contract namespace, then by asset class (Composer uses the term "registry" for this final level of partitioning).

      That would be an accurate elevator pitch in my opinion.

      Kim

Kim Letkeman
Senior Technical Staff Member, IBM Watson IoT

IoT Blockchain


Phone: +1 (613) 762-0352
E-mail:
kletkema@...


      <graycol.gif>"rpjday@..." ---05/19/2018 05:31:40 AM--- "World State" "The world state represents the current values of all ledger states."

      From:
      "rpjday@..." <rpjday@...>
      To:
      Hyperledger Fabric discussion list <hyperledger-fabric@...>
      Date:
      05/19/2018 05:31 AM
      Subject:
      [Hyperledger Fabric] more weird phrasing in "ledger.md"
      Sent by:
      fabric@...





      "World State"

      "The world state represents the current values of all ledger states."

      i'm pretty sure i know what that line is *trying* to say, but i'm also
      sure that's not the best way to say it. thoughts?

      rday









Re: more weird phrasing in "ledger.md"

ben.taylor@sophrosynecapital.com <ben.taylor@...>
 

The two of you have both done a great job of providing clarity for the community.

I know this is controversial but will throw it out there.  The misuse of the term “ledger” is an original sin in the blockchain community.

The blockchain is the JOURNAL; the world state is the LEDGER.

On May 19, 2018, at 12:38 PM, Kim Letkeman <kletkema@...> wrote:

Yeah, that sounds a little twisted.

I describe world state as a set of key value pairs in a peer's database with keys being asset identifiers (or related identifiers) and the values being *current* state for that key. World state is partitioned by channel, then by smart contract namespace, then by asset class (Composer uses the term "registry" for this final level of partitioning).

That would be an accurate elevator pitch in my opinion.

Kim


Kim Letkeman
Senior Technical Staff Member, IBM Watson IoT

IoT Blockchain


Phone: +1 (613) 762-0352
E-mail:
kletkema@...


<graycol.gif>"rpjday@..." ---05/19/2018 05:31:40 AM--- "World State" "The world state represents the current values of all ledger states."

From: "rpjday@..." <rpjday@...>
To: Hyperledger Fabric discussion list <hyperledger-fabric@...>
Date: 05/19/2018 05:31 AM
Subject: [Hyperledger Fabric] more weird phrasing in "ledger.md"
Sent by: fabric@...





"World State"

"The world state represents the current values of all ledger states."

i'm pretty sure i know what that line is *trying* to say, but i'm also
sure that's not the best way to say it. thoughts?

rday








Re: more weird phrasing in "ledger.md"

Kim Letkeman <kletkema@...>
 

Yeah, that sounds a little twisted.

I describe world state as a set of key value pairs in a peer's database with keys being asset identifiers (or related identifiers) and the values being *current* state for that key. World state is partitioned by channel, then by smart contract namespace, then by asset class (Composer uses the term "registry" for this final level of partitioning).

That would be an accurate elevator pitch in my opinion.

Kim


Kim Letkeman
Senior Technical Staff Member, IBM Watson IoT

IoT Blockchain


Phone: +1 (613) 762-0352
E-mail:
kletkema@...


"rpjday@..." ---05/19/2018 05:31:40 AM--- "World State" "The world state represents the current values of all ledger states."

From: "rpjday@..." <rpjday@...>
To: Hyperledger Fabric discussion list <hyperledger-fabric@...>
Date: 05/19/2018 05:31 AM
Subject: [Hyperledger Fabric] more weird phrasing in "ledger.md"
Sent by: fabric@...






"World State"

"The world state represents the current values of all ledger states."

i'm pretty sure i know what that line is *trying* to say, but i'm also
sure that's not the best way to say it. thoughts?

rday








Re: stupid question -- is "chaincode" singular or plural?

Kim Letkeman <kletkema@...>
 

Frankly, I have never liked "chaincode" as a term, because it appears to mean pretty much anything in the realm of a smart contract, the physical code implementing a smart contract, and the same code running in a container against a channel and a peer.

I prefer to limit the term chaincode to mean (a) the development language and environment for smart contracts on Fabric, and (b) a physical manifestation of a smart contract. Thus, we have the chaincode interface (stub), the chaincode container, and the chaincode itself running in the container.

The term I prefer to refer to smart contracts is ... well ... "smart contract", which pluralizes just fine.

So a smart contract is pretty much self-defining, and a physical manifestation of a smart contract is a chaincode, but also just a smart contract. If the context is the Fabric development environment or the peer/channel operational environment, then chaincode is appropriate. If the context is an application or system role, then smart contract makes a lot more sense to me.

But there definitely are no "chaincodes" in my opinion :-)

Kim


Kim Letkeman
Senior Technical Staff Member, IBM Watson IoT

IoT Blockchain


Phone: +1 (613) 762-0352
E-mail:
kletkema@...


"rpjday@..." ---05/19/2018 05:43:30 AM--- yes, i am this nitpicky ... the docs seem to bounce around between treating the phrase "chaincode

From: "rpjday@..." <rpjday@...>
To: Hyperledger Fabric discussion list <hyperledger-fabric@...>
Date: 05/19/2018 05:43 AM
Subject: [Hyperledger Fabric] stupid question -- is "chaincode" singular or plural?
Sent by: fabric@...






  yes, i am this nitpicky ... the docs seem to bounce around between
treating the phrase "chaincode" as both singular and plural, depending
on the context, in that there is frequent use of the word "chaincodes"
suggesting *that* is how you refer to more than one.

 from peers.md:

 "We can see that it's the peer that hosts both the ledger and
 chaincode."

from that, it's not precisely clear whether it's describing one smart
contract, or more than one. thoughts? is there a need for more
precision here?

rday








Re: stupid question -- is "chaincode" singular or plural?

Joe Alewine <joe.alewine@...>
 

I take the attitude that one chaincode is "chaincode" and multiple chaincodes are just that, chaincodes. I think it's useful in helping people see that peers can host multiple chaincodes, rather than letting them assume there can only be one.
 
Regards,
 
Joe Alewine
IBM Blockchain, Raleigh
 
rocket chat: joe-alewine
slack: joe.alewine
 
 
 

----- Original message -----
From: "rpjday@..." <rpjday@...>
Sent by: fabric@...
To: Hyperledger Fabric discussion list <hyperledger-fabric@...>
Cc:
Subject: [Hyperledger Fabric] stupid question -- is "chaincode" singular or plural?
Date: Sat, May 19, 2018 5:43 AM
 
   yes, i am this nitpicky ... the docs seem to bounce around between
treating the phrase "chaincode" as both singular and plural, depending
on the context, in that there is frequent use of the word "chaincodes"
suggesting *that* is how you refer to more than one.

  from peers.md:

  "We can see that it's the peer that hosts both the ledger and
  chaincode."

from that, it's not precisely clear whether it's describing one smart
contract, or more than one. thoughts? is there a need for more
precision here?

rday



 
 


Re: more weird phrasing in "ledger.md"

rpjday@crashcourse.ca <rpjday@...>
 

On Sat, 19 May 2018, Gari Singh wrote:

Agree .... the phrasing is definitely odd.

Maybe something like:

"The world state represents that latest value of each key stored in
the ledger"
there's something about that entire "ledger" section that just seems
... off, but i can't put my finger on it. i'll give this more thought
until i figure out what it is.

rday


Re: more weird phrasing in "ledger.md"

Gari Singh <garis@...>
 

Agree .... the phrasing is definitely odd.

Maybe something like:

"The world state represents that latest value of each key stored in the ledger"


-----------------------------------------
Gari Singh
Distinguished Engineer, CTO - IBM Blockchain
IBM Middleware
550 King St
Littleton, MA 01460
Cell: 978-846-7499
garis@...
-----------------------------------------

-----fabric@... wrote: -----
To: Hyperledger Fabric discussion list <hyperledger-fabric@...>
From: "rpjday@..."
Sent by: fabric@...
Date: 05/19/2018 05:31AM
Subject: [Hyperledger Fabric] more weird phrasing in "ledger.md"

"World State"

"The world state represents the current values of all ledger states."

i'm pretty sure i know what that line is *trying* to say, but i'm also
sure that's not the best way to say it. thoughts?

rday


stupid question -- is "chaincode" singular or plural?

rpjday@crashcourse.ca <rpjday@...>
 

yes, i am this nitpicky ... the docs seem to bounce around between
treating the phrase "chaincode" as both singular and plural, depending
on the context, in that there is frequent use of the word "chaincodes"
suggesting *that* is how you refer to more than one.

from peers.md:

"We can see that it's the peer that hosts both the ledger and
chaincode."

from that, it's not precisely clear whether it's describing one smart
contract, or more than one. thoughts? is there a need for more
precision here?

rday


more weird phrasing in "ledger.md"

rpjday@crashcourse.ca <rpjday@...>
 

"World State"

"The world state represents the current values of all ledger states."

i'm pretty sure i know what that line is *trying* to say, but i'm also
sure that's not the best way to say it. thoughts?

rday