<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<p>Hi Daniel</p>
<p>The problem I have with the DIF Presentation Exchange is that it
mixes up the semantic level with the syntactic level.
Administrators who specify WHAT claims they want are working at
the semantic level, and this should be in the DIF data model,
whereas protocols that say HOW this should be exchanged and say
how they want claims to be formatted are working at the syntactic
level. <br>
</p>
<p>It has been said that PE is a data model and not a protocol but I
dispute this because of the above mixing of layers.</p>
<p>DIF PE does not help interworking because it allows the RP to
request claims in one format (or to not specify any format) and
the client to return them in a different format that the RP cannot
support. PE would serve the community much better if it simply
stated which claims are needed and stayed at the semantic level.<br>
</p>
<p>Thus I think DIF PE needs to remove all its contents about claim
encodings and allow this to be specified in the protocol layer
where proper negotiation can take place, or none if a particular
protocol mandates a particular format always be used.<br>
</p>
<p>Otherwise the way that PE specifies which claims are needed is
pretty comprehensive, even if it is somewhat complex and overkill
for the vast majority of use cases (although I admit that much of
the complexity can be omitted if it is not needed.)<br>
</p>
<p>Kind regards</p>
<p>David</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 06/05/2021 23:33, Daniel Buchner via
Openid-specs-ab wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:01F51X1QQ4WRXY92CZG8D0YVTD@bitbucket.org">
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">New issue 1230: Adopt Presentation Exchange as an officially supported mechanism within SIOP
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://bitbucket.org/openid/connect/issues/1230/adopt-presentation-exchange-as-an">https://bitbucket.org/openid/connect/issues/1230/adopt-presentation-exchange-as-an</a>
Daniel Buchner:
[DIF Presentation Exchange \(identity.foundation\)](<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://identity.foundation/presentation-exchange/spec/v1.0.0/">https://identity.foundation/presentation-exchange/spec/v1.0.0/</a>) has now been adopted by all major VC-focused standards organizations and industry groups. As I see more and more duplicative proposals, Issues, and spec details popping up in this SIOP work, it’s becoming clear we need to regroup and reassess those aspects of the SIOP initiative. I am unclear why the PE primaries were not pulled in to ensure uptake of these cross-compatible specs, but the time is now to reorient. We can accelerate this entire SIOP initiative by leveraging the work the community has done in DIF. This is an umbrella decision that should be addressed as both a top-level proposal and individual, targeted issues that resolve the duplicative activities in favor of the existing solution - I will begin opening those over the next few days.
_______________________________________________
Openid-specs-ab mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Openid-specs-ab@lists.openid.net">Openid-specs-ab@lists.openid.net</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-specs-ab">http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-specs-ab</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>