[OpenID-Specs-eKYC-IDA] Issue #1263: name of above_18 example in advanced syntax for claims is potentially ambiguous (openid/ekyc-ida)

[josephheenan]

New issue 1263: name of above_18 example in advanced syntax for claims is potentially ambiguous
https://bitbucket.org/openid/ekyc-ida/issues/1263/name-of-above_18-example-in-advanced

Joseph Heenan:

The name `above_18` for the example transformed claim in the spec is potentially ambiguous, particularly for some non-native English speakers \(i.e. does it mean “18 and over” or “above 18 \(exclusive\)”.

People have a habit of copying the examples in specs so it may be worth renaming it to “18\_or\_over” or something similar.

‌