Files
ng-eventually/packages/polyfill
Sylvain Duchesne 3be8da2178 fix: régler l'identité n'a plus le droit de réclamer une session
Le partage était cassé : Bob n'ouvrait pas le document qu'Alice venait de lui
partager, sans erreur, juste « (illisible) ». Régression introduite en scindant
ensureIdentity().

Chaîne observée aux sondes, pas déduite : settleIdentity() appelait
setCurrentUser, qui déclenche startConnect(), qui va chercher la session via le
thunk getSession de l'application. Or l'exemple appelle init() DEPUIS
L'EXÉCUTEUR qui construit sessionReady — le thunk ne peut donc pas répondre, par
construction. Il lève, resolveAccount rend null, l'exécution est abandonnée sans
restauration ni drainage, mais s'est déjà enregistrée « en vol ». Le
ensureIdentity() suivant rejoint cette exécution morte et se résout sans avoir
rien fait.

Avant la scission, rien n'appelait setCurrentUser pendant l'évaluation du
module : la session existait, l'exécution était saine, et la rejoindre était
sans danger. C'était bien une affaire de moment.

bootstrap.ts scinde le setter : adoptCurrentUser enregistre qui agit,
setCurrentUser reste « enregistrer + connecter » pour tous les autres appelants.
La moitié sans session ne réclame donc plus de session, et se connecter
redevient l'affaire du seul ensureIdentity(), attendu, là où une session existe.

Ce que ça bloque, tracé avant de livrer : une application qui appellerait init()
sans jamais appeler ensureIdentity() n'aurait plus de restauration en arrière-
plan. Aucun appelant de ce genre n'existe, et avant la scission init() était un
passthrough nu qui ne déclenchait rien — c'est une répartition rétablie, pas un
comportement retiré.

Reste connu, non corrigé : connectedUser mémorise toujours une exécution
abandonnée. Le piège est documenté sur setCurrentUser.
2026-08-11 19:03:58 +02:00
..

@ng-eventually/polyfill

One entry point. Most of what it publishes has the same signature as the future SDK — ng, useShape, watchShape, docs, inbox, storeRegistry, readUnion (+ types) — and is a drop-in for @ng-org/web / @ng-org/orm: as NextGraph matures it resolves to the real SDK (build alias removed) with no code change.

One call does not, and it is the whole of what you will delete: configure. It exists because one shared wallet hosts every user; upstream, an application imports the SDK and each user opens their own wallet. src/index.ts groups it under a heading that says so. (ensureIdentity is a second in substance — the shared-wallet gate — but its call site survives: an application still awaits a session before it renders.)

(There were two entry points until 2026-08-07, . and ./polyfill, and the second one WAS that list. One door is easier to import from and says less — hence the grouping, and hence docs/api-contract.md, whose export inventory a test keeps honest.)

Per-symbol, with the target signature and an epistemic label on every claim: docs/api-contract.md.

Reading is key possession, and the isolation here is still fake. The cap surface has the shape of the real model — you hold a document's ReadCap or you do not read it, and there is no authorization list anywhere — but nothing is encrypted yet and the stand-in key is a constant. Nothing this library does may be described as "anonymous" or "private" until per-document encryption lands (P1b).

import {
  // SDK-shaped — the real SDK replaces these in place.
  ensureIdentity, storeRegistry, inbox, readUnion, docs,
  // Polyfill-era — one call, and it is the whole of what goes away.
  configure,
} from "@ng-eventually/polyfill";

configure({ ng: realNg, useShape: realUseShape, getSession, sharedWallet });
await ensureIdentity();              // who I am (returned), connection work awaited
const doc = await storeRegistry.createEntityDoc("protected");
await docs.sparqlUpdate(sid, `INSERT DATA { … }`, doc);
const subjects = await readUnion(await storeRegistry.listMyEntityDocs("protected"));

Principle — the polyfill compensates, it never extends

Its only reason to exist is to bridge a NextGraph implementation gap. Every non-SDK surface must map to something NextGraph will provide natively, and must fall away at that point — no bespoke features, no observability, no convenience API that isn't strictly "NextGraph will do this later". The test for any proposed addition: does it compensate a real, exhibited gap? If not, it belongs in the consumer application. And a compensation whose gap is not actually exhibited on the target broker is dead weight, not defensive code.

Both halves are binding — the surface AND the implementation stay as close as possible to what NextGraph plans. The question to ask at every choice: would this make a caller learn something it has to UNLEARN at migration? If yes, it is a deviation, whatever it buys.

What the polyfill adds, each emulated now and native later:

  • Shared-wallet identity — one wallet hosts every user, so the library fabricates virtual users and confines every access to the connected one (emulated-verifier/reach.ts). Upstream, each user opens their own wallet.
  • Capability emulation — per-identity cap possession plus a read filter over it: you read the documents whose cap you hold. There is no authorization list, because the real model has none.
  • Inboxpost, postToDocument, share, and the recipient's processing. The model is verified (an inbox is a keypair on one repo); no JS surface exists yet.

Generic by construction: no application domain here. See examples/notebook for an application written against it, which the e2e suite drives.

How a document is reached — the three acts, and no others

import { storeRegistry, inbox, readUnion } from "@ng-eventually/polyfill";

// 1. CREATE — you hold its cap, with nothing to declare. No identity parameter: a
//    session belongs to one user, exactly as the target's own `doc_create` assumes.
const doc = await storeRegistry.createEntityDoc("protected");

// 2. GIVE TO READ — name the document and the person. The key is looked up and
//    sealed into a deposit; the recipient applies it by connecting, with nothing
//    to call. Irreversible: there is no revoking a key already handed out.
await inbox.share(doc, "bob");

// 3. CIRCULATE THE REFERENCE — no call at all. Every reference this surface returns
//    is BARE: it names the document and grants nothing. If the document sits in a
//    PUBLIC store, the store serves its read cap to whoever asks, so the bare
//    reference is enough to read it — and if it does not, the reference still names
//    it and opens nothing.
const publicDoc = await storeRegistry.createEntityDoc("public");
// …put `publicDoc` in a QR code, a message, another document. Nothing else to do.
await readUnion([publicDoc]);   // a stranger holding only this reads it

The invariant behind all three: you never derive a cap from a bare reference. You look it up in what you hold, you were given it, or a public store served it. A did:ng:o:… without :r: names a document and opens nothing — which is what makes confidentiality composable: a widely circulated document may point at a restricted one, and following the reference gets you a name, not a key. See docs/readcap-and-nuri-model.md § 0.

The types carry that invariant

Nuri and ReadCap are template literal types, not string aliases:

type Nuri    = `did:ng:${string}`
type ReadCap = `did:ng:${string}:r:${string}`

They are still strings — assignable to string, JSON-serializable, no wrapper — but the distinction is checked. A ReadCap goes wherever a Nuri is expected (a cap is a NURI with the key inside); the reverse does not compile.

Permissive in, precise out. Public entries take NuriLike (Nuri | string) and validate at the door, so a value coming from storage, a URL or a form needs no narrowing and no cast on your side; what they return is a precise Nuri. The runtime checks stay regardless — a JavaScript caller never meets the compiler.

const saved = localStorage.getItem("doc");        // string | null
if (saved) await readUnion([saved]);              // ✓ validated at the door