feat(satp): Detect inconsistencies between SATP code and draft (Stage 0 and Stage 1 inconsistencies)

[LordKubaya]

Verify Inconsistencies: Examine and address any discrepancies between Stage 0 and Stage 1. Identify Repetitions and Omissions: Detect repeated steps and any incomplete actions within the process. Refine Arguments: Either reject arguments or revise them to ensure coherence. SATP Draft

[pandaio22]

Approach method:

1. Map SATP-Stage 0 draft requirements;
2. Understand cactus-plugin-satp-hermes implementation;
3. Detect and propose corrections to incoherences;
4. Repeat procedure for Stage 1.

[pandaio22]

Stage 0 Draft Requirements:

[pandaio22]

Stage 1 Draft Requirements:

Issue 3752_Stage1.pdf

[pandaio22]

Inconsistencies between SATP draft (v8) and SATP's implementation documented in the attached file.

ISSUE3752_PSIT.pptx

[pandaio22]

Stage 1 Inconsistencies - Spec and code attributes naming is inconsistent

• Issue: Incoherence between specification naming of attributes and implementation

• Reference: file in attachement

ISSUE3752_PSIT.pptx

• TODO: Ensure coherence between specification and code.

• [ ] Decide if either the specification or code must be changed;

• Case: Spec needs to change

• [ ] Propose a spec change based on the latest version of the code

• Case: Code needs to change

• [ ] Update the code to match the standing draft version