tbdex
tbdex copied to clipboard
TBD54566975
Readme is still showing ❌ for some features that have been implemented as part of 1.0 https://github.com/TBD54566975/tbdex?tab=readme-ov-file#features
rewrite [this section](https://github.com/TBD54566975/tbdex/tree/main/specs/http-api#submit-orderclose) and fix table of contents
## Context On a recent tbDEX Ecosystem Partners workstream call, one of the partners building a PFI raised the question of how to handle cases such as: - pay-in succeeds...
`paymentDetails` is marked as optional within the `PrivatePaymentDetail` object, which is also optional in `privateData`. **Proposal:** `paymentDetails` should be required. ie. If passing the optional `PrivatePaymentDetail`, it _must_ contain `paymentDetails`....
The discussion revolved around whether the protocol version of a Request For Quote (RFQ) in an http-server needs to match the protocol version of the Offering that it corresponds to....
Context: https://github.com/TBD54566975/tbdex/pull/294#pullrequestreview-1964982715 > one thing I realize, is that there is an assumption baked into this proposal that the claims included in the presentation submission are issued in a format...
Thanks for the super reader-friendly tbDEX 1.0 spec! Really appreciate the clarity and thoughts that went into creating the protocol, which made the read-through an enjoyable experience! I just have...
describe steps that need to be taken in order to validate a message that aren't covered by JSON Schema. e.g. prefix in `metadata.id` must match `metadata.kind`. [context](https://github.com/TBD54566975/tbdex/issues/280#issuecomment-2025480681)
context: https://github.com/TBD54566975/tbdex/issues/280#issuecomment-2025492654
Pointed out by @thehenrytsai > The term "KYC" listed in the Jargon Decoder but is never referenced anywhere in the document. 😆