[Openid-specs-ab] Issue #1312: Make sub_jwk optional with DIDs (openid/connect)

[Edmund Jay]

New issue 1312: Make sub_jwk optional with DIDs
https://bitbucket.org/openid/connect/issues/1312/make-sub_jwk-optional-with-dids

Edmund Jay:

Comments from KY regarding for [pull request #39](https://bitbucket.org/openid/connect/pull-requests/39/merging-cp-into-ca)

[https://bitbucket.org/openid/connect/pull-requests/39/merging-cp-into-ca#comment-237220226](https://bitbucket.org/openid/connect/pull-requests/39/merging-cp-into-ca#comment-237220226)

[https://bitbucket.org/openid/connect/pull-requests/39/merging-cp-into-ca#Lopenid-connect-claims-aggregation/openid-connect-claims-aggregation-1\_0.mdT477](https://bitbucket.org/openid/connect/pull-requests/39/merging-cp-into-ca#Lopenid-connect-claims-aggregation/openid-connect-claims-aggregation-1_0.mdT477)

It has been discussed in SIOP special call that it is enough for the key material in DID Document to match kid in the header \(in this case of the signed req\), and sub\_jwk is not needed with dids.

‌