Closed oliverfoster closed 4 years ago
I think it's more of a poor naming choice. getActorId
is only ever used in a display-only context, even by getObjectId
which itself is only used for displaying something.
Really, getActorId
as a name doesn't make sense at all given the possibility of an account
IFI-type, as that only attempts uniqueness as a homePage
/ name
pairing. We use Keycloak UUID's for name
with the TLA implementations, but the spec doesn't enforce any formatting -- "The unique id or name used to log in to this account"
.
I'd almost rather getActorId
just be replaced with getActorIdString
, since that's a more intuitive definition.
Cool. Same with getObjectId
> getObjectIdName
?
I can alias them and output a deprecated warning for the original named function calls.
getActorIdString
andgetActorID
seem to process the id in two different ways.getActorIdString
seems to take account ofactor.member
butgetActorId
does not. Is this an oversight or is it intended?