<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
</head>
<body>
<div dir="ltr">
<div></div>
<div>
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">There is a PR addressing this topic: <a rel="noreferrer noopener" href="https://bitbucket.org/openid/connect/pull-requests/461/changed-types-claim-to-type-to-comply-with?link_source=email">https://bitbucket.org/openid/connect/pull-requests/461/changed-types-claim-to-type-to-comply-with</a></div>
<div dir="ltr">Please review.</div>
<div dir="ltr"><br>
</div>
<div dir="ltr">The issue documenting the insights would be great too :)</div>
<div dir="ltr"><br>
</div>
<div dir="ltr">Cheers,</div>
<div dir="ltr">Kristina</div>
<div dir="ltr"><span id="ms-outlook-ios-cursor"></span></div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<hr style="display:inline-block;width:98%" tabindex="-1">
<div id="divRplyFwdMsg" dir="ltr"><font face="Calibri, sans-serif" style="font-size:11pt" color="#000000"><b>From:</b> Openid-specs-ab <openid-specs-ab-bounces@lists.openid.net> on behalf of Brian Campbell via Openid-specs-ab <openid-specs-ab@lists.openid.net><br>
<b>Sent:</b> Wednesday, February 22, 2023 3:28:38 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> Artifact Binding/Connect Working Group <openid-specs-ab@lists.openid.net><br>
<b>Cc:</b> Brian Campbell <bcampbell@pingidentity.com><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [Openid-specs-ab] OpenID4VCI: JSON-LD processing of request and metadata fields</font>
<div> </div>
</div>
<div>
<div dir="ltr">
<div>Thanks for the insights Judith, <br>
</div>
<div>Please do open an issue - I worry that the mailing list discussion will get lost in the noise and passage of time. Or not even seen by the document editors.
<br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>
<div dir="ltr"><br>
</div>
<br>
<div class="x_gmail_quote">
<div dir="ltr" class="x_gmail_attr">On Sat, Feb 18, 2023 at 2:18 AM Judith Kahrer via Openid-specs-ab <<a href="mailto:openid-specs-ab@lists.openid.net">openid-specs-ab@lists.openid.net</a>> wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote class="x_gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204); padding-left:1ex">
<div dir="auto">Hi David,
<div dir="auto">Thanks for sharing your point of view and confirming some assumptions. I fully agree with you. The statement is not my opinion but was a quote from the current specification that did NOT refer to any verifiable credential but required JSON-LD
processing for a metadata field and request parameter (see <a href="https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fopenid.net%2Fspecs%2Fopenid-4-verifiable-credential-issuance-1_0.html%23server_metadata_ldp_vc&data=05%7C01%7CKristina.Yasuda%40microsoft.com%7C300a986f9a3d4ee0b2e608db152c9f02%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C638127054545167232%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C2000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=gXV9WX7ENRGUGuTIoPF4P7%2F0kLMKWCDl%2BmzYcUjmXaM%3D&reserved=0" originalsrc="https://openid.net/specs/openid-4-verifiable-credential-issuance-1_0.html#server_metadata_ldp_vc" shash="eJQ4gVBGvomI2cvAxCgoG5+dlucIJIvQgkUiVX9/dFsUjd+iy2Jg7Eq5WpEd/vPAoSTYUe6R7zS5NvIDoGw67kT/HUkaLS+Q28PueQ+MyUmByVLFA1OpVk88piJnDteeA6CJWFez5W/V8JOGpmBe3D4DzcDwsylEdiVLGRcYhh0=" target="_blank">E.1.3.2</a> and
<a href="https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fopenid.net%2Fspecs%2Fopenid-4-verifiable-credential-issuance-1_0.html%23section-e.1.3.3&data=05%7C01%7CKristina.Yasuda%40microsoft.com%7C300a986f9a3d4ee0b2e608db152c9f02%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C638127054545167232%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C2000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=e%2BGzLCzSShtumt6q3aBqa0szShhMaV2i1O%2FHT5BzXPg%3D&reserved=0" originalsrc="https://openid.net/specs/openid-4-verifiable-credential-issuance-1_0.html#section-e.1.3.3" shash="TSuCdunkDWFSnYeNl03lDWfwKAMuSpv8+Y52xJd95I2IaqXvrhF3c3UMb+NDowac9MwEf8u3eoIJvfPyk1i6Fw4ZYfhpl8e05oIqsFP9QZpnJhbKaYxQX7L0ilpxFMPMwAef0zkitG392qruz7pt+dtqdfLVRG2DO4l+TqtVRDM=" target="_blank">
E.1.3.3</a> in Appendix E of the current draft). I also think, that metadata and protocol defined in OpenID4VCI should be pure JSON and not JSON-LD. Consequently, the requirements regarding JSON-LD processing for <span style="font-family:"Courier New"">credentials_supported</span> and <span style="font-family:"Courier New"">credential_definition</span> should
be removed as those are part of the metadata and request respectively. They are not, once more, any credential (such can only be found in credential responses).<br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">Following that, any <font face="Courier New">@context</font>-field in an object that is NOT a credential, should be removed as well. I'll open an issue with suggested changes.</div>
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
Regards, Judith <br>
<br>
<div class="x_gmail_quote" dir="auto">
<div dir="ltr" class="x_gmail_attr">On Sat, Feb 18, 2023, 08:59 David Chadwick via Openid-specs-ab <<a href="mailto:openid-specs-ab@lists.openid.net" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">openid-specs-ab@lists.openid.net</a>> wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote class="x_gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204); padding-left:1ex">
<div>
<p>Hi Judith</p>
<p>thankyou for your excellent response. I agree with most of what you say, but not the following "This object MUST be processed using full JSON-LD processing". It is my understanding that the protocol and metadata are pure JSON and should not be referred to
as JSON-LD. Thus the current text is wrong if it either states or implies this. OTOH, the retrieved object may be a W3C Conformant VC (in which case it MUST contain the @context property) but this does not mean that the wallet has to perform any JSON LD processing
on it. On the contrary pure JSON processing is sufficient if the semantics of JSON-LD are not required and JWT proofs are being used (I am not sure if the same is true for LD proofs). Interworking between JSON-LD processing and pure JSON processing issuers
and wallets has already been adequately demonstrated (in the JFF plugfest). So I do not believe having an @context property in a credential is an issue that OID4VCI should be concerned with. Personally I do not think that our protocol should be supporting
non-standard credential formats (i.e. any type of JWT) and should only support ISO mdl and W3C VCs either JWT or LD-proofed (but I think I am in a minority here). However, the W3C VC F2F this week has now agreed that verifiable credentials must have an @context
property. Other serialisations that do not contain an @context property may be specified, but mapping rules from these to W3C VCs must be defined for them to be accepted in the W3C VC v2 recommendation. The mapping may be one way (from serialisation X to W3C
VCs) or bi-directional and lossless. However, no examples of serialisation X have been fully specified so far, so until they are I do not think OID4VCI should include them (which currently it does).</p>
<p>Kind regards</p>
<p>David</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
_______________________________________________<br>
Openid-specs-ab mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Openid-specs-ab@lists.openid.net" target="_blank">Openid-specs-ab@lists.openid.net</a><br>
<a href="https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.openid.net%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fopenid-specs-ab&data=05%7C01%7CKristina.Yasuda%40microsoft.com%7C300a986f9a3d4ee0b2e608db152c9f02%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C638127054545167232%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C2000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=H61xFEsTxrx5nZL9YbR27At14x4PfQQ7TGhyrWTALOw%3D&reserved=0" originalsrc="https://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-specs-ab" shash="k5gjefPoDJ8DFmaGmMSFSx9iM2/2gpLgak6RvitWDx2rVK8dsn360dC1K+zLvlVn1RhM2F1XNgfZPeTZ2c3DlQF6uPb5gSzV7W7YyUkkF047qF+mLSLVf8VOuwkyag5CIj8nS1olGx5XS4q8hSjJqqNHfSgpt1t+F019z+uuobc=" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-specs-ab</a><br>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<br>
<i style="margin:0px; padding:0px; border:0px; outline:0px; vertical-align:baseline; background:rgb(255,255,255); color:rgb(85,85,85)"><span style="margin:0px; padding:0px; border:0px; outline:0px; vertical-align:baseline; background:transparent; font-weight:600"><font size="2">CONFIDENTIALITY
NOTICE: This email may contain confidential and privileged material for the sole use of the intended recipient(s). Any review, use, distribution or disclosure by others is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify
the sender immediately by e-mail and delete the message and any file attachments from your computer. Thank you.</font></span></i></div>
</body>
</html>