Removed delegation #281
Removed delegation #281
Conversation
Rebasing (I hope!)
update my fork
|
@David-Chadwick, from looking at the diff, it seems like this PR is doing more than just removing delegation? Can you make sure you're basing it off of the most recent version of the spec? You should be able to use git tools to make sure your fork is up to date, but if they're giving you too much trouble you could "hard reboot" by reforking the repo. |
|
It is based on the very latest version that I took earlier this afternoon. If you look carefully, you will see that I have also simply moved (but not edited) the "Subject only terms of use" section from the "Subject Passes the Verifiable Credential to a Holder" section the to the "Subject is Holder" section (where it more correctly belongs), because the section it was in has effectively been removed to the appendix. |
| this specification may also be noted in the text. Examples of | ||
| how to use this data model using privacy-enhancing technologies | ||
| such as zero-knowledge proofs are also provided. | ||
| </p> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@David-Chadwick, did you mean to remove this?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Certainly not. If I did I truly apologise
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I have just checked the master copy that I pulled as the above text is not in my original version. So I did not edit it out.
| @@ -1965,7 +1880,7 @@ <h2>Holder Acts on Behalf of the Subject</h2> | |||
| <pre class="example nohighlight" title="An example of the relationship | |||
| property in a child's credential">{ | |||
| "id": "http://dmv.example.gov/credentials/3732", | |||
| "type": ["VerifiableCredential", "ProofOfAgeCredential"], | |||
| "type": ["VerifiableCredential", "ChildProofOfAgeCredential"], | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Did you mean to change this?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yes, I made this comment many weeks ago in an issue and it seemed to get overlooked.
Rationale: the contents of this VC are different from the other VCs that are proof of age, therefore the type should be different
| is disputed. | ||
| </p> | ||
|
|
||
| <pre class="example nohighlight" title="Subject disputes a credential"> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Did you mean to remove all this? It seems like a reversion of the current spec and the PR that was pulled in to clean this DisputeCredential stuff up.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
No I did not mean to remove this. This was a mistake
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I have just checked my master copy and I did not remove this. It was already removed.
So I guess I did not edit the latest version.
It is probably better to simply remove my PR and I will start all over again.
| @@ -3397,7 +3270,84 @@ <h3>Device Theft and Impersonation</h3> | |||
| </ul> | |||
|
|
|||
| </section> | |||
| <section> | |||
| <h2>Accessibility Impact</h2> | |||
| <p>There are a number of accessibility considerations of which implementors should be aware when processing data described in this specification. As with any implementation of web standards or protocols, ignoring accessibility issues will make this information unusable to a large subset of the population. It is important to follow accessiblity guidelines and standards such as [WCAG21] to ensure that all people, regardless of ability can make use of this data. This is especially important when establishing cryptography and encryption which historically have created problems for assistive technologies. | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
If this was intentionally moved, can you restore the formatting to what was removed above?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actually, this also appears to be a reversion of another commit that moved the accessibility section and cleaned up the formatting already: 99b0dc9
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I will try to fix my mistakes now. Sorry for the finger trouble
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Can we simply delete this PR and I will start all over again with a new master copy
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Whatever works best for you! :)
|
@David-Chadwick, I left a few comments on the sections that didn't seem like you intentionally removed, i.e., the ones that appear to revert to an older version of the spec. |
| this specification may also be noted in the text. Examples of | ||
| how to use this data model using privacy-enhancing technologies | ||
| such as zero-knowledge proofs are also provided. | ||
| </p> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I have just checked the master copy that I pulled as the above text is not in my original version. So I did not edit it out.
| <p> | ||
| In this case, the <a>claim</a> may contain multiple properties that each | ||
| provide an aspect of the identity of the subject, and which together | ||
| unambiguously identify the subject. | ||
| </p> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The above change was not made by myself, but was already in the master copy that I pulled
| is disputed. | ||
| </p> | ||
|
|
||
| <pre class="example nohighlight" title="Subject disputes a credential"> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I have just checked my master copy and I did not remove this. It was already removed.
So I guess I did not edit the latest version.
It is probably better to simply remove my PR and I will start all over again.
| @@ -3397,7 +3270,84 @@ <h3>Device Theft and Impersonation</h3> | |||
| </ul> | |||
|
|
|||
| </section> | |||
| <section> | |||
| <h2>Accessibility Impact</h2> | |||
| <p>There are a number of accessibility considerations of which implementors should be aware when processing data described in this specification. As with any implementation of web standards or protocols, ignoring accessibility issues will make this information unusable to a large subset of the population. It is important to follow accessiblity guidelines and standards such as [WCAG21] to ensure that all people, regardless of ability can make use of this data. This is especially important when establishing cryptography and encryption which historically have created problems for assistive technologies. | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Can we simply delete this PR and I will start all over again with a new master copy
|
Please delete this PR as it has been replaced by #283 |
Rejigged the Subject-Holder Relationship section to remove the contentious delegation section and put it in a non-normative Appendix as an example.
Preview | Diff