fix: align JWT fields according to RFC and VC spec #11
Conversation
Signed-off-by: Philipp Bolte <philipp.bolte@spherity.com>
Signed-off-by: Philipp Bolte <philipp.bolte@spherity.com>
Signed-off-by: Philipp Bolte <philipp.bolte@spherity.com>
|
work here addresses parts of P&A ticket Open-Credentialing-Initiative/Digital-Wallet-Conformance-Criteria#58 |
specification/draft/index.html
Outdated
| @@ -905,89 +905,95 @@ <h3>Verifiable Presentation of DSCSA Stakeholder Credentials</h3> | |||
| <p> | |||
| Verifiable Presentations may be used to combine and present credentials. They can be packaged in such a way that | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Verifiable Presentations may be used to combine and present credentials. They can be packaged...
I don't quite get the purpose of the intro. The "may" & "can" are non-normative. So, OCI doesn't seem to state that VP are to be used (is there an alternative?) but then goes on to define VP structure and errors. Or have I missed a clear statement of the requirement elsewhere?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I have not looked at the other parts of this spec in detail but I agree with you.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I just exchanged the may with are
Signed-off-by: Philipp Bolte <philipp.bolte@spherity.com>
| <td> | ||
| Contains the corrUUID for which the VP has been generated for. | ||
| A digital wallet SHALL include a `verifiableCredential` field in the `vp` object. This field contains | ||
| the embedded ATP Verifiable Credential. | ||
| </td> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
so, did we lose a field that contains the corrUUID? not needed anymore?
re spelling:
verifiableCredentialfield
pls check capitalisation. seems to be a mix here and further above.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I moved it up. That's the nonce field you probably mean. It is verifiableCredential because that's how it's spelled in the JSON object. Camel case.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
ah, that's the "random value" you refer to further up. will it be clear enough for wallets to understand that they need to place the corrUUID in nonce or should we be explicit?
This PR aligns the JWT fields in accordance to RFC7519 and the W3C VC spec.
