W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-credentials@w3.org > June 2016

Re: Data model abstract

From: Dave Longley <dlongley@digitalbazaar.com>
Date: Mon, 13 Jun 2016 10:34:37 -0400
To: David Chadwick <d.w.chadwick@kent.ac.uk>, W3C Credentials Community Group <public-credentials@w3.org>
Message-ID: <575EC47D.9000709@digitalbazaar.com>
On 06/12/2016 03:52 PM, David Chadwick wrote:
> I would like to suggest a change to the latest data model document
> http://opencreds.org/specs/source/claims-data-model/
>
> Specifically, the document abstract currently says
>
> A TBD credential is a set of claims made by an entity about an
> identity. A TBD credential may refer to a qualification, achievement,
> quality, or other information about an identity such as a name,
> government ID, home address, or university degree that typically
> indicates suitability.
>
> The problem I have with this, is that the set of claims are being
> made about an identity, rather than the set of claims actually being
> the identity. In my opinion the above is in direct contradiction to
> the first sentence of the abstract which says 'An identity is a
> collection of attributes about an entity'.
>
> I would therefore like to change the abstract to read
>
> A TBD credential is a set of claims made by one entity (the issuer)
> about another entity (the holder). A TBD credential may refer to a
> qualification, achievement, quality, or other information about the
> entity. A set of credentials forms one of possibly many identities
> of the entity.
>
> If this is agreed, then other similar changes will be needed
> throughout the document such as: a collection of digital TBD
> credentials that assert claims about that identity. TBD Credentials
> are associated with identities etc.

I don't see the same contradiction, so the language is failing in one
way or another. I consider "an identity" to be the superset of all
possible sets of credentials. A set of credentials is merely a profile
of that identity.

We should probably change all of this language to talk instead about a
Subject, which is given an identifier. And then talk about how
associations can be made between that identifier and other pieces of
information, in order to establish claims/attributes about the Subject.
That may help avoid the "identity" confusion altogether.


-- 
Dave Longley
CTO
Digital Bazaar, Inc.
http://digitalbazaar.com
Received on Monday, 13 June 2016 14:35:01 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 11 July 2018 21:19:29 UTC