OpenID4VP
OpenID4VP copied to clipboard
openid
vp_token definition referencing OpenID4VCI
The vp_token definition requires that the OpenID4VCI specification is followed for some of the details of the verifiable presentation content. This has a few issues. :
- It is strange that an issuance specification defines the details for how to do presentation, instead of specifying the presentation details in the presentation specification.
- For some document formats, both the VCI spec as well Appendix B of OpenID4VP have requirements for the credential response. The current text explicitly says that OpenID4VCI must be followed if it specifies something for the credential response, this seems to be a contradiction to also having credential response requirements in OpenID4VP.
- For MSO_mdoc the Credential Response requirements in the OpenID4VCI spec do not make sense in the context of OpenID4VP, we should make it clear what exactly is meant with “If Appendix A of [OpenID.VCI] defines a rule for encoding the respective Credential format in the Credential Response, this rules MUST also be followed when encoding Credentials of this format in the vp_token response parameter.”
Can we remove the reference / mandate of using the OpenID4VCI specification for credential response encoding requirements?
I agree this isn't the best.
I think removing the reference to VCI here and adding definitions for the contents of vp_token in Appendix B would be good, as Martijn notes this has already been done in the mdl section in Appendix B.
super weird that it still points to VCI. it should point to VP Annex B and I thought we have done a PR fixing it, but apparently not. If you could do a small PR fixing this to annex B in VP, happy to approve and merge
A bit off-topic, but somewhat related thing that I noticed when reading the Annex specifying the format specific parts: We have a Section in VCI VC signed as a JWT, Using JSON-LD which seems to not have a counterpart in VP?
On-topic: Yep that looks like something that should be fixed
