Re: Revised Verifiable Claims WG Charter (RC-2) (was Re: Problem statement)

I've followed-up independently[1]
[1] https://github.com/solid/node-solid-server/issues/429

On Thu, 11 Aug 2016 at 04:11 David Chadwick <d.w.chadwick@kent.ac.uk> wrote:

>
>
> On 10/08/2016 17:07, Shane McCarron wrote:
> > Actually....
> >
> > On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 10:45 AM, David Chadwick
> > <d.w.chadwick@kent.ac.uk <mailto:d.w.chadwick@kent.ac.uk>> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >     Three comments on this:
> >     i) Specific processors will presumably be controlled by the user
> sending
> >     the VC to the chosen inspector, so this is quite straightforward
> >     ii) We currently do not say anything about specific periods of time
> as
> >     far as I am aware, so there is a mismatch here between your
> definition
> >     and the model
> >
> >
> > See the use cases; H.4 [1]
>
> I missed that one! Thankyou
>
> >
> >
> >     iii) I would like to add to the end of your proposal 'and ensure that
> >     the credentials do not contain correlating identifiers' (notice that
> I
> >     specifically said credential rather than claim in this respect)
> >
> >
> > Friendly amendment: and ensure that the credentials are not required to
> > contain correlating identifiers.
>
> Ok, thanks. Or maybe, 'do not contain unintended correlating
> identifiers' which is slightly different to 'not required to'
>
> David
>
> >
> > [1] http://w3c.github.io/webpayments-ig/VCTF/use-cases/#uneed_H_4
> >
> >
> > --
> > Shane McCarron
> > Projects Manager, Spec-Ops
>