Re: [Rats] Supply Chain Attestation (was Re: 3 Use cases)

[Michael Richardson <[e-mail]>]

Henk Birkholz <[e-mail]> wrote:
    > That brings up an interesting topic.

    > If you want to nest objects/maps in EAT, do you have to define a separate EAT
    > for each layer or can you define nested (potentially multiple) sub-structures
    > as a single EAT flavor/specification? Like a "required nesting that is
    > predefined".

And there are two ways to do this.

A: (eat (eat (eat (eat X))))
B: (eat (eat) (eat) (eat) (eat))

And they aren't mutually exclusive, either:
C: (eat (eat (eat) (eat (eat))) (eat))

(A) above is the where there are multiple layers of Supply Chain, and each
    is made up ofaggregated things.
(B) is where one takes a few different assemblies together.

For instance:
  Door assembly system + 6 chair-systems => train compartment
  4x train compartments + 40 open-seats + bathroom + 4 outer-door systems  => wagon 11
  wagons 1->11 => ICE 802

I'm not in favour of arbitrary ways to do things as I think it will be too
difficult for relying parties to understand.  I look at the incredible
difficulty that XPATH interpretation of XML and HTML documents presents.

On the other hand, I'd want the system to be sufficiently maleable to not
instantly break because a sub-assembly changed sub-sub-suppliers.

I don't have a good answer here.

--
Michael Richardson <[e-mail]>, Sandelman Software Works
 -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-