diff --git a/README.md b/README.md index cd7a4c73129402e77958c0b0403fa14ba6b3c2a1..abeefc2a9c1defb5a821a2e65a07120774ed876d 100644 --- a/README.md +++ b/README.md @@ -161,7 +161,7 @@ and it needs to consist of the following structure: --- id: term title: Term page -hoverText: This hover text will appear in the documentation page that you reference this term +hoverText: "This hover text will appear in the documentation page that you reference this term." --- ### Term explanation diff --git a/docs/functional-architecture.md b/docs/functional-architecture.md index 94155346347f42a3d304df81b0c2c2a45582e5b4..588c7aca7c332b0cb2f04168474ce267d98f4c2e 100644 --- a/docs/functional-architecture.md +++ b/docs/functional-architecture.md @@ -26,11 +26,11 @@ Figure 1 shows the initial *functional* eSSIF-Lab architecture, and its scope, c Please be aware that *functional* capabilities, components, %%agents|agent%%, etc. do not necessarily coincide with *technical* capabilities, components, %%agents|agent%%, etc. The technical components can be deployed (downloaded, installed, run), whereas a functional component is a provider of a specified set of capabilities/functionalities an implementation of which can be made part of a technical component. So it is conceivable that a technical component contains an implementation of %%issuer|issuer%%, %%wallet|wallet%%, %%holder|holder%% and %%verifier|verifier%% functional components as well as other functionalities that are not described here, e.g. related to UX, setting %%preferences|policy%%, and more. In this functional architecture, the default type of components, %%agents|agent%% etc. are *functional*. -Since the %%participants|participant%% of a %%business transaction|transaction%% are different %%parties|party%%, the negotiation, commitment and execution of that %%transaction|transaction%% will be done by %%agents|agent%% of these %%parties|party%%. Assuming that a single %%transaction|transaction%% has two such %%parties|party%%, we will use the term '%%Peer Party|peer-party%% (of a specific %%party|party%%, in the context of a single %transaction)' to refer to the participating %%party|party%% in that %%transaction|transaction%% that is not the specific %%party|party%% itself. +Since the %%participants|participant%% of a %%(business) transaction|transaction%% are different %%parties|party%%, the negotiation, commitment and execution of that %%transaction|transaction%% will be done by %%agents|agent%% of these %%parties|party%%. Assuming that a single %%transaction|transaction%% has two such %%parties|party%%, we will use the term '%%Peer Party|peer-party%% (of a specific %%party|party%%, in the context of a single %transaction)' to refer to the participating %%party|party%% in that %%transaction|transaction%% that is not the specific %%party|party%% itself. When an %%agent|agent%% is involved in such a %%transaction|transaction%%, it will be communicating with a component that it assumes to be an %%agent|agent%% of the %%peer party|peer-party%% of its %%principal|principal%% (the %%agent|agent%% may obtain further assurances for that, but that's outside the scope for now). We will use the term '%%peer agent|peer-agent%% (of a specific %%agent|agent%%, in the context of a single %%transaction|transaction%%)' to refer to an %%actor|actor%% with which the specific %%agent|agent%% has a communication session. Note that establishing whether or not an %%actor|actor%% is a %%Peer Agent|peer-agent%% does not necessarily require knowing who the %%peer party|peer-party%% actually is. -The figure below is an overview of the most important *functional* components that any %%party|party%% needs to conduct electronic %%business transactions|transaction%%. +The figure below is an overview of the most important *functional* components that any %%party|party%% needs to conduct electronic %%(business) transactions|transaction%%.