You’re splitting a weird hair here, every single ocap language I’m aware of has objects in the sense of OOP. And o ap isn’t the only kind of capability system, Pony for example has two separate systems. March works a lot like Austral and Roc. Modules and functions need capacities which can be granted at an app root, a program can have multiple app roots to segregate authority on a machine or a cluster.
Again I said capability system and never claimed ocap.
You are rapidly burning through the presumption of good faith. This is not a hairsplitting distinction, but a completely different approach to computer security, and claiming that the difference is insignificant is strongly suggestive of a grift. CHERI's ocaps are largely capabilities to assembly-language memory regions, and Jonathan Rees's seminal ocap work was at the Scheme language level, which also doesn't have OO. Pony's ocaps are also not generally to OO objects.