[cap-talk] Petnames versus E-order with ocaps

[Charles Landau]

Stiegler, Marc D wrote:
> Attempting to be more precise, it is a one to one binding between an
> object reference and a particular user context. If you and I hold the
> same object reference, we can have different petnames for it.

That doesn't seem right, because there are many user contexts, so the 
map can't be one-to-one.

Would you say that, given a particular user context (in which names are 
interpreted), a petname is a one to one binding between an object 
reference and a name (a text string)?