- From: David Chadwick <d.w.chadwick@kent.ac.uk>
- Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2016 22:08:11 +0100
- To: public-credentials@w3.org
I have the same two problems with both diagrams: 1. The storage of the subject identifier in the repository is optional, as per earlier discussion with Manu today, but is seen to be mandatory in both diagrams. It should be marked optional. 2. Verifying identity ownership can be done by direct communication with the holder (in the case where the holder is the subject and the identifier is a public key) but this option is not represented in the diagram. In terms of the arrows, I prefer Dave Crocker's version regards David On 14/06/2016 18:34, Dave Longley wrote: > Hi all, > > Please take a look at these two proposed diagrams for capturing the core > Verifiable Claims architecture in a single image and provide feedback: > > The first diagram was shown during the VCTF call and uses looping arrows > to show an actor initiating an action and interacting with another role > in the system: > > https://docs.google.com/drawings/d/1M2cfMOCbXmMhg8Ar2YeCiRhMsJK-hzkCf1L_hJKMOHY/edit > > > The second diagram incorporates Dave Crocker's edits and uses > unidirectional arrows to show the flow of information: > > https://docs.google.com/drawings/d/1CI1_NAT6g1h2dRN2AL1X8p8F0czSLg84gSebxZYdMKw/edit > > >
Received on Tuesday, 14 June 2016 21:08:31 UTC