Evaluate if the current tests are sufficient / accurate for addressing the following normative statements in the spec

[JSAssassin]

ecdsa-rdfc-2019:

1. The value of the proofValue property of the proof MUST be an ECDSA signature produced according to [FIPS-186-5] and SHOULD use the deterministic ECDSA signature variant.

   • See - https://www.w3.org/TR/vc-di-ecdsa/#dataintegrityproof
   • Test - https://github.com/w3c/vc-di-ecdsa-test-suite/blob/main/tests/10-create.js#L111-L130

2. If options.type is not set to the string DataIntegrityProof and options.cryptosuite is not set to the string ecdsa-rdfc-2019, then a PROOF_TRANSFORMATION_ERROR MUST be raised.

   • See - https://www.w3.org/TR/vc-di-ecdsa/#transformation-ecdsa-rdfc-2019
   • Tests:
     • https://github.com/w3c-ccg/data-integrity-test-suite-assertion/blob/main/index.js#L299-L311
     • https://github.com/w3c/vc-di-ecdsa-test-suite/blob/update-tests/tests/20-verify.js#L53-L58

3. Set proofConfig.created to options.created. If the value is not a valid [XMLSCHEMA11-2] datetime, an INVALID_PROOF_DATETIME error MUST be raised.

   • See - https://www.w3.org/TR/vc-di-ecdsa/#transformation-ecdsa-rdfc-2019
   • Test - https://github.com/w3c-ccg/data-integrity-test-suite-assertion/blob/main/index.js#L366-L373

If the tests are inadequate and do not cover the normative statements, please provide suggestions for how we can effectively test them. @aljones15 @BigBlueHat cc: @dlongley