W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-credentials@w3.org > November 2014

Re: [ba-standard] Considering the Open Badges crypto tech stack

From: Eric Korb <eric.korb@accreditrust.com>
Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2014 13:13:58 -0500
Message-ID: <CAMX+RnDdPHzN1qwajcMRxfzvDuGtDtox7Rxxiw07H5RbYgES8w@mail.gmail.com>
To: ba-standard@googlegroups.com
Cc: Credentials Community Group <public-credentials@w3.org>, Brian Brennan <brian@mozillafoundation.org>, Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>, "openbadges-dev@googlegroups.com" <openbadges-dev@googlegroups.com>
@Kerri @all (reposted)

We had a deep conversation during our last Credentials Community Call on
Nov 25, 2014.  May I suggest that you read the minutes (listen to audio
reply) that can be found here: http://www.w3.org/community/credentials/

IMHO, trying to support more than one signature type would not be the best
course of action because it would make implementations really complicated.
I expect the CCG to continue to evaluate the technical merits of JOSE and
SM methodologies, but more importantly their applicability to
micro-credentials.

Thanks for the input.

Eric


On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 4:35 PM, Kerri Lemoie <kerri@achievery.com> wrote:

> I'm a little bit late jumping in on this thread. I've been thinking about
> Jason's message.
>
> Currently the verification type is binary - either hosted or signed.
> Should we consider extending the verification type so that it can include
> both JOSE and JSON-LD and for that matter any type we haven't yet
> considered? Verifiers/validators can then determine what they will accept.
> All that the standard needs to provide is that a verification type is
> required.
>
>
>
Received on Wednesday, 26 November 2014 18:14:45 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 19:46:54 UTC