-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 37
Remove PE as a query language #479
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Copilot reviewed 5 out of 25 changed files in this pull request and generated no comments.
Files not reviewed (20)
- examples/request/dcql_ac_vc_sd.json: Language not supported
- examples/request/dcql_jwt_vc.json: Language not supported
- examples/request/dcql_ldp_vc.json: Language not supported
- examples/request/pd_ac_vc.json: Language not supported
- examples/request/pd_ac_vc_sd.json: Language not supported
- examples/request/pd_jwt_vc.json: Language not supported
- examples/request/pd_ldp_vc.json: Language not supported
- examples/request/pd_sd_jwt_vc.json: Language not supported
- examples/request/request_object_client_id_did.json: Language not supported
- examples/request/vp_token_alternative_credentials.json: Language not supported
- examples/request/vp_token_type_and_claims.json: Language not supported
- examples/request/vp_token_type_only.json: Language not supported
- examples/response/jarm_jwt_enc_only_vc_json_body.json: Language not supported
- examples/response/jarm_jwt_vc_json_body.json: Language not supported
- examples/response/presentation_submission.json: Language not supported
- examples/response/presentation_submission_multiple_vps.json: Language not supported
- examples/response/ps_ac_vc_sd.json: Language not supported
- examples/response/ps_jwt_vc.json: Language not supported
- examples/response/ps_ldp_vc.json: Language not supported
- examples/response/ps_sd_jwt_vc.json: Language not supported
leecam
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Might be better to split out the support for contains in a separate PR. But looks good to me either way
Co-authored-by: Christian Bormann <8774236+c2bo@users.noreply.github.com>
| `invalid_presentation_definition_uri`: | ||
|
|
||
| - The Presentation Definition URL cannot be reached. | ||
|
|
||
| `invalid_presentation_definition_reference`: | ||
|
|
||
| - The Presentation Definition URL can be reached, but the specified `presentation_definition` cannot be found at the URL. | ||
|
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I support it, and we never defined dcql_query_uri parameter but I think it's worth noting that with this PR, we are losing the ability to pass query language by reference
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
That ability doesn't work with DC API anyway so I'm not sure it's a big loss.
| <{{examples/response/token_response_vp_token_sd_jwt_vc.txt}} | ||
|
|
||
| In this example the `vp_token` contains only the disclosures for the claims specified in the `presentation_submission`, along with a Key Binding JWT. | ||
| The `transaction_data_hashes` response parameter defined in (#transaction_data), if Transaction Data is used, MUST be included in the Key Binding JWT as a top level claim. This means that transaction data mechanism cannot be used with SD-JWT VCs without cryptographic key binding (i.e., which do not use the KB-JWT). |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Co-authored-by: Andres Olave <sloops77@users.noreply.github.com>
TimoGlastra
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
c2bo
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Not sure about that one sentence to validate vp_token - everything else looks good to me
| `invalid_presentation_definition_uri`: | ||
|
|
||
| - The Presentation Definition URL cannot be reached. | ||
|
|
||
| `invalid_presentation_definition_reference`: | ||
|
|
||
| - The Presentation Definition URL can be reached, but the specified `presentation_definition` cannot be found at the URL. | ||
|
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
That ability doesn't work with DC API anyway so I'm not sure it's a big loss.
Co-authored-by: Timo Glastra <timo@animo.id>
Co-authored-by: Joseph Heenan <joseph@authlete.com>
Co-authored-by: Joseph Heenan <joseph@authlete.com>
|
|
||
| * `proof_type_values`: OPTIONAL. A JSON array containing types of proofs that | ||
| the Verifier accepts to be used in the Verifiable Presentation, for example | ||
| `["RsaSignature2018"]`. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
'18 was a good vintage for RSA
bc-pi
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
swooping in at the 11th hour with some trivial nitpicking suggestions but overall approve
(done with permission of Daniel, who checked them but isn't currently somewhere where he could easily apply them) Co-authored-by: Brian Campbell <71398439+bc-pi@users.noreply.github.com>
|
Merging as per agreement on yesterday's WG call and noting that there have been no objections to Kristina explicitly asking on the mailing list if anyone had any concerns ( https://lists.openid.net/pipermail/openid-specs-digital-credentials-protocols/Week-of-Mon-20250331/000707.html ) |
This PR does the following:
Introduce the DCQL feature- reverted, see discussioncontainsto enable matching W3C VC types, which so far was not possible with DCQLFixes #211
merging this unblocks PR on #6