Property

proposals/3989-redact-origin-field.md

@@ -1,33 +1,33 @@
-# MSC3989: Redact `origin` field on events
+# MSC3989: Redact `origin` property on events
 
 The [current redaction algorithm](https://spec.matrix.org/v1.6/rooms/v10/#redactions) *keeps* the
 top-level `origin` property on events during redaction, however, as of this writing, the only use within the
-spec of `origin` as a top-level event property is a malformed example of event format. The field has no
+spec of `origin` as a top-level event property is a malformed example of event format. The property has no
 significant meaning in modern room versions.
 
-Within the ecosystem, it's clear that we'd [prefer the field to disappear](https://github.com/matrix-org/matrix-spec/issues/374),
+Within the ecosystem, it's clear that we'd [prefer the property to disappear](https://github.com/matrix-org/matrix-spec/issues/374),
 and have [tried to do so](https://github.com/matrix-org/matrix-spec/pull/998) in the past. The
 malformed examples are even [known to us](https://github.com/matrix-org/matrix-spec/issues/1480).
 
 What's not clear, and mentioned in [a comment](https://github.com/matrix-org/matrix-spec/issues/1480#issuecomment-1495183789),
-is whether the `origin` field is *actually* used. There do not appear to be any auth rules or similar
-which would use the field, however it'd hardly be the first time that the spec was wrong about an
+is whether the `origin` property is *actually* used. There do not appear to be any auth rules or similar
+which would use the property, however it'd hardly be the first time that the spec was wrong about an
 ancient room version like v1. What is clear is that Synapse, where this question would be asked,
-wants to [drop support](https://github.com/matrix-org/synapse/issues/3816) for the field and has
+wants to [drop support](https://github.com/matrix-org/synapse/issues/3816) for the property and has
 taken [steps](https://github.com/matrix-org/synapse/pull/8324) towards that mission by fixing bugs
 in the area. In a [quick audit](https://github.com/matrix-org/matrix-spec-proposals/pull/3989#issuecomment-1497659507)
-of the Synapse codebase during implementation of this MSC, the `origin` field appears unused.
+of the Synapse codebase during implementation of this MSC, the `origin` property appears unused.
 
-Given the above context, this proposal removes the `origin` field from the [redaction algorithm](https://spec.matrix.org/v1.7/rooms/v10/#redactions)
+Given the above context, this proposal removes the `origin` property from the [redaction algorithm](https://spec.matrix.org/v1.7/rooms/v10/#redactions)
 in a future room version, leaving it as-is for existing versions (not that an MSC can change the behaviour
 of an already-stable room version anyways).
 
-Some other fields are additionally useless in modern room versions, however they are already adapted
+Some other properties are additionally useless in modern room versions, however they are already adapted
 by [MSC2176](https://github.com/matrix-org/matrix-spec-proposals/pull/2176).
 
 ## Proposal
 
-In a future room version, the `origin` field is *removed* from the list of *event* keys which are
+In a future room version, the `origin` property is *removed* from the list of *event* keys which are
 kept during redaction. Note that this requires a new room version because changing the redaction
 algorithm changes how [event IDs](https://spec.matrix.org/v1.6/rooms/v10/#event-ids) are calculated,
 as they are [reference hashes](https://spec.matrix.org/v1.6/server-server-api/#calculating-the-reference-hash-for-an-event)