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

Re: Data model abstract

From: David Chadwick <d.w.chadwick@kent.ac.uk>
Date: Mon, 13 Jun 2016 16:26:22 +0100
To: Dave Longley <dlongley@digitalbazaar.com>, W3C Credentials Community Group <public-credentials@w3.org>
Message-ID: <14fe0363-c6f0-0386-0ed4-167567123726@kent.ac.uk>


On 13/06/2016 15:34, Dave Longley wrote:
> 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.

Can I ask you "how many identities can a subject have?". Your sentence
above implies the answer is one. If so, then we have a fundamental
disagreement

regards

David


> 
> 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.
> 
> 
Received on Monday, 13 June 2016 15:26:45 UTC

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