Repository navigation
Conversation
Add a Token (CIP-0112) library page for openzeppelin-tokenCIP112-v1 and remove the settlement page. Correct the library, setup, and reference implementation pages against the current sources. Rewrite the prose to be shorter and more direct.
…nt sources Add the Scoped Authorization Grant page and remove the Access Control and Ownable pages, which canton-contracts no longer contains. Update the SDK baseline to 3.5.8, the package paths, the token test gates, and the Reference Implementation summaries to the current design documents.
✅ Deploy Preview for openzeppelin-docs-v2 ready!
To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify project configuration. |
laurenmxv
left a comment
laurenmxv
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks Pepe, this is great. The Pausable page in particular is really good, and the SCU retrofit section covers something people get wrong all the time.
Two things outside the line comments:
Token page. canton-contracts#45 (merged 21 Oct) reworked the token package (new paths, three packages, allowances and compliance hooks removed), so the page no longer matches main. I'd suggest pulling it out of this PR so everything else can ship, and doing the token page separately. I'll message you on Slack.
Redirects. This PR deletes /canton/settlement, /canton/library/access-control and /canton/library/ownable. Those URLs are live now, so after merge anyone arriving from search, a forum post or a partner's link lands on a 404. A 301 sends them to the replacement page and carries over most of the old pages' search value. Adding this to netlify.toml covers it:
# Canton
[[redirects]]
from = "/canton/settlement"
to = "/canton/library"
status = 301
[[redirects]]
from = "/canton/library/access-control"
to = "/canton/library/scoped-authorization-grant"
status = 301
[[redirects]]
from = "/canton/library/ownable"
to = "/canton/library/scoped-authorization-grant"
status = 301Settlement can point to the token page once that lands.
| Every scope field must match exactly. | ||
|
|
||
| - `resourceInstanceCid = None` matches by logical fields only, so a grant applies to successor contracts. | ||
| - `resourceInstanceCid = Some cid` binds the grant to one contract ID. The guard compares IDs; it does not fetch the resource. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This doesn't compile as written. resourceInstanceCid is Optional (ContractId ()), so passing a typed ID like Some self is a type error. Both examples and the README wrap it with coerceContractId.
| - `resourceInstanceCid = Some cid` binds the grant to one contract ID. The guard compares IDs; it does not fetch the resource. | |
| - `resourceInstanceCid = Some (coerceContractId cid)` binds the grant to one contract ID. The guard compares IDs; it does not fetch the resource. |
| -- protected effects | ||
| ``` | ||
|
|
||
| `requireAuthorization` fetches the grant, checks the authority, the grantee, and the scope, then exercises `AuthorizationGrant_Use`. It returns the grant. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Two things people will hit the first time they wire this up. Both are in the package README, but they belong here too:
| `requireAuthorization` fetches the grant, checks the authority, the grantee, and the scope, then exercises `AuthorizationGrant_Use`. It returns the grant. | |
| `requireAuthorization` fetches the grant, checks the authority, the grantee, and the scope, then exercises `AuthorizationGrant_Use`. It returns the grant. | |
| The grantee is usually not a stakeholder of the protected contract, so a stakeholder has to disclose that contract to the grantee before it can exercise the choice. Each guarded call also brings in the grant's `authority` as a confirming party, so the authority's participant must be online for every protected call. Prefer an authority that already signs the protected contract. |
| ## Test Against a Local Ledger | ||
|
|
||
| Daml Script tests run in-memory by default, but you can point the same scripts at a real local Canton ledger over gRPC, which is useful for validating time semantics, party visibility, and DAR uploads before targeting a shared network: | ||
| `dpm test` runs Daml Script tests on an in-memory ledger. To check time behavior, party visibility, and DAR upload on a real ledger, run the same scripts against a local Canton sandbox over the Ledger API: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Following the page as written, the first test won't build, because the daml.yaml above doesn't include daml-script. Adding it to the app package works but makes damlc warn that templates depend on Daml Script, so a separate test package is the cleaner pattern. That's also how the library does it under test/.
| `dpm test` runs Daml Script tests on an in-memory ledger. To check time behavior, party visibility, and DAR upload on a real ledger, run the same scripts against a local Canton sandbox over the Ledger API: | |
| Keep your Daml Script tests in a separate test package: list `daml-script` under `dependencies`, and your application DAR (plus any library DARs the tests import) under `data-dependencies`. Adding `daml-script` to the application package itself makes `damlc` warn that its templates depend on Daml Script. In the commands below, start the sandbox with your application DAR and pass the test package's DAR to `dpm script`. | |
| `dpm test` runs Daml Script tests on an in-memory ledger. To check time behavior, party visibility, and DAR upload on a real ledger, run the same scripts against a local Canton sandbox over the Ledger API: |
| The DEX settles through the Token Standard V2 interfaces, so it works with any conforming token registry. | ||
|
|
||
| ## Lending Protocol | ||
| **Design document:** [Privacy-Preserving DEX](https://github.com/OpenZeppelin/canton-specs/blob/main/docs/reference-architectures/dex.md) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The DEX design doc still lists openzeppelin-access-control-v1 as a component, and this PR removes that package from the docs. A short note would save readers some confusion until the design doc catches up.
| **Design document:** [Privacy-Preserving DEX](https://github.com/OpenZeppelin/canton-specs/blob/main/docs/reference-architectures/dex.md) | |
| The design document still references the retired Access Control package. The library now provides [Scoped Authorization Grant](/canton/library/scoped-authorization-grant) instead. | |
| **Design document:** [Privacy-Preserving DEX](https://github.com/OpenZeppelin/canton-specs/blob/main/docs/reference-architectures/dex.md) |
…eedback Rewrite the Token page for the three packages under packages/token. Mark every package pre-release. Add 301 redirects for the removed Settlement, Access Control, and Ownable pages. Document grant disclosure and the authority as a confirming party, the test-package pattern in Get Started, and the retired package in the DEX design document.
pepebndc
changed the title
Summary
This PR makes the Canton section match
OpenZeppelin/canton-contractsmain(1899f7a) andOpenZeppelin/canton-specsmain. It includes the commits of #240.Changes
openzeppelin-scoped-authorization-grant-v1: types, grant lifecycle, guards, typed policies, scope and resource identity, disclosure and confirmation requirements, failure statuses, security considerations, and the licensing and treasury RBAC examples.packages/token/(types-v1,utils,v1): templates, lifecycle (transfer, mint offer, burn, batch and iterated settlement), the utils trust rules for consumers that own their templates, security considerations, data-dependencies on the Splice 0.8.3 interface DARs, and the test gates.netlify.tomlredirects them with 301s: Settlement to Token, Access Control and Ownable to Scoped Authorization Grant.Verification
biome check src/navigation/canton.jsonand the link validator pass.next dev: all Canton pages render with status 200.data-dependenciesand imports compile against DARs built from canton-contractsmain. The Scoped Authorization Grant API on the page compiles against the package DAR.