Skip to content
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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

Add confidenceMethod to table of reserved terms and v2 @context #1142

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
Aug 2, 2023
Merged

Add confidenceMethod to table of reserved terms and v2 @context #1142

Show file tree
Hide file tree
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
4 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
ad2b73a
Update reservation table
OR13 Jun 6, 2023
381a0f7
Update contexts/credentials/v2
OR13 Jun 6, 2023
2437b70
Update URL to add confidenceMethod specification.
msporny Aug 1, 2023
a0b38f9
Update index.html
OR13 Aug 2, 2023
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Diff view
Diff view
4 changes: 4 additions & 0 deletions contexts/credentials/v2
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -60,6 +60,10 @@
"termsOfUse": {
"@id": "https://www.w3.org/2018/credentials#termsOfUse",
"@type": "@id"
},
"confidenceMethod": {
"@id": "https://www.w3.org/2018/credentials#confidenceMethod",
"@type": "@id"
Comment on lines +64 to +66
Copy link
Contributor

@jandrieu jandrieu Jun 14, 2023 •
edited

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Shouldn't this be scoped to credentialSubject?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

It should either be globally scoped or use "@propagate": true, but, yes, making it a property on a VC only isn't correct.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I believe confidenceMethod could be scoped to any property/ies. I don't understand what it would do for credentialSubject, nor what it does for VerifiableCredential.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Based on the comments above, I don't think it should be scoped... However, if it should be scoped, there should be normative statements that people can read, before the context scoping is applied... and some human readable summary of why, here:

https://www.w3.org/2018/credentials#confidenceMethod

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Maybe https://w3id.org/security#confidenceMethod would be a better term definition, if the W3C CCG will define the behavior.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

By "scoped to any property/ies" above, I meant that this confidenceMethod should be applicable to any property+value pair (or group of same), something like

_:property
   [ _:value          12345 ; 
     confidenceMethod `{uri to method used to get or usable to test value}` 
   ]

}
}
},
Expand Down
23 changes: 22 additions & 1 deletion index.html
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -3291,6 +3291,26 @@ <h3>Reserved Extension Points</h3>
</thead>

<tbody>
<tr>
<td>`confidenceMethod`</td>
<td>
A property used for specifying one or more methods that a verifier
might use to increase their confidence that the value of an attribute in or of
a verifiable credential or verifiable presentation is accurate, including but not
limited to attributes such `initialRecipient` (a/k/a `issuee`), `presenter`,
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I know I missed the merge. You can probably fix this with a direct commit, rather than going through all the PR hoops...

Suggested change
limited to attributes such `initialRecipient` (a/k/a `issuee`), `presenter`,
limited to attributes such as `initialRecipient` (a/k/a `issuee`), `presenter`,

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks for catching this. Fixed in cf429b1

`authorizedPresenter`, `holder`, etc.
The associated vocabulary URL MUST be
`https://www.w3.org/2018/credentials#confidenceMethod`.
<p class="issue" title="(AT RISK) Reservation depends on implementations">
This property reservation might be deleted in favor of an existing section
in the specification if at least one specification with two independent
implementations are demonstrated by the end of the Candidate Recommendation
Phase. If that does not occur, this reservation will remain, but the existing
section in the specification will be removed.
See <a href="https://w3c-ccg.github.io/confidence-method-spec/">Verifiable Credential Confidence Methods</a>.
</p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>`evidence`</td>
<td>
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -3324,13 +3344,14 @@ <h3>Reserved Extension Points</h3>
<tr>
<td>`renderMethod`</td>
<td>
A property used for specifying how to render a credential into a visual,
A property used for specifying one or more methods to render a credential into a visual,
auditory, or haptic format. The associated vocabulary URL MUST be
`https://www.w3.org/2018/credentials#renderMethod`.
<p class="issue" title="(AT RISK) Reservation depends on implementations">
This reserved property is at risk and will be removed from the
specification if at least one specification with two independent implementations
are not demonstrated by the end of the Candidate Recommendation Phase.
See <a href="https://w3c-ccg.github.io/vc-render-method/">Verifiable Credential Rendering Methods</a>.
OR13 marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved Hide resolved
</p>
</td>
</tr>
Expand Down