Kristina

WG discussion: - we cannot define apu apv values in the profiles of openid4vp spec because then we need a parameter in openid4vp that indicates encryption parameter, which adds somewhat...

we already agreed in the WG in #395 that "it is up to the ecosystem to decide whether to signature validation is mandatory or not" for example, under eIDAS, if...

WG discussion about defining apu/apv values for ECDH-ES JWE.. - on one hand... - adds marginal security benefit (majority agrees with @selfissued and @bc-pi disagreeing) - would not be the...

WG discussion: - this applies only for signed requests over DC API: "it is up to the ecosystem/policy to decide whether to signature validation is mandatory or not". - multi...

WG discussion - requirement is: how to batch issue large size credentials (like those that have a photo id)? - preferred option is to add guidance for JWE compression (what...

WG discussion: - do a PR with compression alg: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc7516#section-4.1.3 (OPTIONAL) and not hydrated option

@David-Chadwick we can introduce an additional type parameter later on, at this stage, all we are trying to do is to prevent adding a new query language being a breaking...

also agree that `type` parameter discussion requires a separate issue

I am ok with "If neither `presentation_definition`, `presentation_definition_uri`, a scope indicating a credential to be used or any other parameter indicating what credential is being requested **defined by this specification/WG**."...

@David-Chadwick could you please take a look at my suggestions?