-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 103
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
Add examples v2 context and landing page #1110
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.
lgtm
The issue was discussed in a meeting on 2023-05-03
View the transcript3.4. (pr vc-data-model#1066)See github pull request vc-data-model#1066. Brent Zundel: next up is PR 1066. Orie Steele: goals. Dave Longley: just quick clarification.
Dave Longley: and then issuer dependent vocabs but we should also say that this could be a risk.
Dave Longley: we should fix context instead of deleting them from examples. Brent Zundel: two paths possible.
Brent Zundel: agree that the links in the examples should work. Dave Longley: . See github pull request vc-data-model#1110. Dave Longley: to improve examples.
Brent Zundel: orie? Orie Steele: haven't had a chance to review it. |
This PR could be merged right now, per WG process, except that (per last telecon's minutes) @OR13 has noted that he hasn't reviewed it yet and I know he has some strong opinions on it. I don't want to merge something that we might have to undo. I'm going to hold the merge until after the VCWG call on Wednesday, hopefully @OR13 will be able to provide a review by then. Based on his approval here: #1111 (review) -- I expect he's good w/ this PR as well (but want to make sure w/ a explicit confirmation). |
@msporny just merge the PR, this is much better context than v1. |
Merging. open over a week; multiple approvals; no conflicts. |
We need to be able to provide examples in the VC Data Model specification that are well formed VCs, but are constructed in such a way as to highlight certain features of the data model. We have traditionally maintained an examples context that defined all the terms that were used in the examples in the specification. In this iteration of the specification, it has been requested that we use more real-world examples in the specification. While that is a good goal, there have been objections to the types of examples that we would use. For example, some argue that the examples in the specification are too focused on education use cases, others believe that focusing on government identity use cases is not appropriate, still others feel that supply chain examples might be too complicated when certain sections in the specification are attempting to highlight a single feature.
This PR is being raised to address those concerns:
@vocab
so we don't have to maintain every single "example*" type or property in the examples context like we did for v1.Where we can use real-world examples, we will do so. Where we can't (or it muddies the waters wrt. what we're trying to show in the example), we will use the VC example vocabulary.