Christian Bormann

Yeah, I'd agree that the key attestation proof type would solve this problem and was a motivation to introduce that proof type in the first place.

> To help clarify the issue: > > * Currently the `claims` value is a JSON object that mimics the nested structure of the credential > * The proposal is...

> @paulbastian @c2bo is this addressed in #389 PR? I don't think key attestation helps us here - #392 seems more relevant but doesn't seem to fully cover this?

> Why would a wallet have information which bank account the user have in mind? It should be the issuer who provides user with an interface to specify which claims...

Yeah, if we are talking about something similar in OIDC, it would probably be the `claims` Requests Parameter with a requested `value` (https://openid.net/specs/openid-connect-core-1_0.html#IndividualClaimsRequests).

I'd like to bring this discussion up at some point in the future. I don't think it's a super pressing matter but now that ID1 is underway, it might be...

> I support removing batch credential endpoint given that we merge #293 and credential endpoint has possiblities to issue multiple Credential instances for the same Credential Dataset. +1 from me

1) I do not believe this gives us enough flexibility and is too early in the flow and might create privacy problems or unnecessary errors/retries. 2) Without spending a lot...

> Is the goal for this to be a new specification or to be added to OpenID4VP? I'm asking, in part, because if it's going to be a new specification,...

I think there is value in adding this feature, but we should try to be very precise in terms of security implications in the spec and this "mode" should also...