Orie Steele
Orie Steele
data integrity does cover this, jwt does not... is it ok if vc-jwt and data integrity disagree on processing of the `controller` field.
This solution covers the entire JSON object: - https://github.com/transmute-industries/vc-credential-schema-open-api-specification including credential, metadata, and proof.
I implemented a version of this in my latest pass on vc-jwt, that simply converts a single credential to several verifiable credentials.
I don't think this issue is ready for PR.
data integrity did a good job on this: https://w3c.github.io/vc-data-integrity/#retrieve-verification-method I suggest we close this, and note that we do not intend to address this in the core data model.
Suggest we apply post CR label
I support this, perhaps we can cut the feature set down a bit to only the low handing fruit, so its easy to get out an MVP.
If you want SPICE to look at it, we would be happy to help, but I feel it would make alignment more difficult.
I am here to confirm that the current IETF drafts have no support for holder binding, and not timeline for adding it. Is this correct? The reason ask is the...
I license past and future contributions under the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license, allowing licensees to choose either at their option.