[Openid-specs-ab] Issue #1229: Adoption of the "OpenID Connect for W3C Verifiable Credential Objects" (openid/connect)

Tom Jones thomasclinganjones at gmail.com
Mon May 10 15:36:33 UTC 2021

And I find the lack of clarity to be extremely rude and disrespectful of
any sort of meaningful conversation about the issues. If you have a better
definition of claim, please let us hear it.

thx ..Tom (mobile)

On Mon, May 10, 2021, 8:28 AM Oliver Terbu via Openid-specs-ab <
openid-specs-ab at lists.openid.net> wrote:

> This is another example of an extremely rude and disrespectful tone by the
> same person:
> "I want clarity of language. Right now we just have a claim = some crap
> and credential = a pile of crap."
> http://lists.openid.net/pipermail/openid-specs-ab/2021-May/008233.html
> Oliver
> On Mon, 10 May 2021 at 14:39, Kristina Yasuda via Openid-specs-ab <
> openid-specs-ab at lists.openid.net> wrote:
>> Thank you, Nat.
>> As promised, I wanted to outline the relationship between "OpenID Connect
>> for W3C Verifiable Credential Objects" (OIDC4VCO) draft and other existing
>> drafts. (point 2 in this issue)
>> ※ Note that there was a proposal to rename the draft  "OpenID Connect
>> for W3C Verifiable Presentations", but I will use OIDC4VCO abbreviation
>> for now.
>>    - Relationship with OpenID Connect Core: OIDC4VCO uses mechanisms
>>    already defined in OIDC Core, and does not introduce any breaking changes.
>>    - Relationship with SIOP V2 draft: SIOP V2 draft will refer to the
>>    OIDC4VCO draft wrt how W3C verifiable presentations (VPs) can be
>>    transported using SIOP model, since OIDC4VCO draft defines a generic way
>>    how W3C VPs can be used with various OIDC flows including SIOP V2.
>>    - Relationship with Claims Aggregation draft (and Credential Provider
>>    draft once contributed): these drafts will be used by the OP to receive
>>    credentials from the Claims Provider, so that the OP will be able to
>>    present received credentials to the RP using OIDC4VCO draft. These drafts
>>    should be aligned as much as possible.
>>    - Relationship with DIF Presentation Exchange (PE) draft: DIF PE
>>    draft could be used as part of the request syntax in OIDC4VCO draf, which
>>    can be discussed once OIDC4VCO draft is adopted. DIF PE is a query language
>>    that is protocol agnostic, and it does not replace OIDC4VCO draft.
>> This is an initial summary and additional input from the editors/working
>> group is very welcome.
>> A work item to enable transporting W3C VPs using OpenID Connect, will
>> most likely not be successful outside OpenID Foundation AB/C Working Group,
>> because that is where the collective OpenID Connect expertise resides.
>> Best,
>> Kristina
>> ------------------------------
>> *差出人:* Openid-specs-ab <openid-specs-ab-bounces at lists.openid.net> が Nat
>> via Openid-specs-ab <openid-specs-ab at lists.openid.net> の代理で送信
>> *送信日時:* 2021年5月7日 0:55
>> *宛先:* openid-specs-ab at lists.openid.net <openid-specs-ab at lists.openid.net>
>> *CC:* Nat <issues-reply at bitbucket.org>
>> *件名:* [Openid-specs-ab] Issue #1229: Adoption of the "OpenID Connect for
>> W3C Verifiable Credential Objects" (openid/connect)
>> New issue 1229: Adoption of the "OpenID Connect for W3C Verifiable
>> Credential Objects"
>> https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fbitbucket.org%2Fopenid%2Fconnect%2Fissues%2F1229%2Fadoption-of-the-openid-connect-for-w3c&data=04%7C01%7CKristina.Yasuda%40microsoft.com%7C546f6f574aa946624ea408d910a766d3%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637559134036105710%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=v8JUcUVcU4A%2FlkpyB43J2%2B9DB9axNOyOGjmQAe5GU58%3D&reserved=0
>> Nat Sakimura:
>> SIOP SC recommended the adoption of “[OpenID Connect for W3C Verifiable
>> Credential Objects](
>> https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Flists.openid.net%2Fpipermail%2Fopenid-specs-ab%2Fattachments%2F20210505%2Fa198527a%2Fattachment-0001.pdf&data=04%7C01%7CKristina.Yasuda%40microsoft.com%7C546f6f574aa946624ea408d910a766d3%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637559134036105710%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=LdCCcQ1tptJ290hqLdPsJdDWACLjeswgOwEKvhBi%2FyM%3D&reserved=0)”
>> \[1\] as a working group item.
>> \[1\] [
>> https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Flists.openid.net%2Fpipermail%2Fopenid-specs-ab%2Fattachments%2F20210505%2Fa198527a%2Fattachment-0001.pdf&data=04%7C01%7CKristina.Yasuda%40microsoft.com%7C546f6f574aa946624ea408d910a766d3%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637559134036115666%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=38hwxalY%2FRk1ypItq%2Bnxnhd26OE4uUJ79XUm1T8DVNw%3D&reserved=0](https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Flists.openid.net%2Fpipermail%2Fopenid-specs-ab%2Fattachments%2F20210505%2Fa198527a%2Fattachment-0001.pdf&data=04%7C01%7CKristina.Yasuda%40microsoft.com%7C546f6f574aa946624ea408d910a766d3%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637559134036115666%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=38hwxalY%2FRk1ypItq%2Bnxnhd26OE4uUJ79XUm1T8DVNw%3D&reserved=0
>> )
>> Some concerns were expressed by a few WG members.
>> This ticket is to give an opportunity for those members to express their
>> concerns and proposers to reply to them.
>> There are a few criteria for non-adoption of documents: namely
>> 1. If the draft does not fall into the scope of the WG.
>> 2. If the draft is overlapping with existing drafts, the technical
>> content should be raised as an issue and eventually result in PR rather
>> than starting a new draft.
>>     1. NOTE: A non-overlapping portion can be made as an independent
>> document so proposers should consider creating such.
>> 3. If there is a legal or reputational risk for the OIDF in adopting the
>> document. \(The board may intervene on this ground.\)
>> If the issues are only on the technical nature of the proposed draft that
>> does not fall into the above criteria, then, it should be dealt with during
>> and after the adoption of the document.
>> _______________________________________________
>> Openid-specs-ab mailing list
>> Openid-specs-ab at lists.openid.net
>> https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Flists.openid.net%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fopenid-specs-ab&data=04%7C01%7CKristina.Yasuda%40microsoft.com%7C546f6f574aa946624ea408d910a766d3%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637559134036115666%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=zj60E0N480Cv0Pqtne%2FbRk%2FOu8%2BJ8toFtZ6kNncNnHY%3D&reserved=0
>> _______________________________________________
>> Openid-specs-ab mailing list
>> Openid-specs-ab at lists.openid.net
>> http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-specs-ab
> _______________________________________________
> Openid-specs-ab mailing list
> Openid-specs-ab at lists.openid.net
> http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-specs-ab
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openid.net/pipermail/openid-specs-ab/attachments/20210510/6d92dbcc/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the Openid-specs-ab mailing list