- From: Stone, Matt <matt.stone@pearson.com>
- Date: Fri, 20 May 2016 12:19:52 -0600
- To: David Chadwick <d.w.chadwick@kent.ac.uk>
- Cc: Jason Weaver <jweaver@parchment.com>, Eric Korb <eric.korb@accreditrust.com>, Credentials Community Group <public-credentials@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CA+w1=RSQm_KKhmdnTYtVxKyoMGzJHqhD2hhuKx=T6XKtpUoR2w@mail.gmail.com>
this is an expiration on the credential, itself, right? something like
this: certified in xyz, effective 1/1/2012, expiring 1/1/2013.
do we have anything like a "time to live" for the claim itself - i'm
inspired by TTL in DNS. a secondary server can hold DNS information for a
brief period w/out going back to the master for updates. In the repository
model, something like this might make for a more resilient and performant
system.
-stone
=====
Matt Stone
501-291-1599
On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 12:04 PM, David Chadwick <d.w.chadwick@kent.ac.uk>
wrote:
> HI Jason
>
> yes that is correct. I think 'expires' should be mandatory on the
> credential message and not need to be on the embedded claims (unless
> these are different for each claim)
>
> regards
>
> David
>
> On 20/05/2016 18:39, Jason Weaver wrote:
> > Hi, Eric, David.
> >
> > I think the distinction David is making about a requirement on the
> > expiration of the claim message, versus the expiration of the claim
> > content itself that OB expire refers to and makes optional, correct?
> >
> > Thank you,
> > Jason
> > *--*
> >
> > *JASON WEAVER *| DIRECTOR, DIGITAL CREDENTIALS STRATEGY
> > CO-CHAIR, PESC EDUCATION RECORD USER GROUP
> > jweaver@parchment.com <mailto:jweaver@parchment.com>
> > direct 480.719.1646 <tel:480.719.1646>* *ext. 1017
> > 6263 North Scottsdale Road, Suite 330, Scottsdale, AZ 85250
> >
> > *Parchment *|* *Turn Credentials into Opportunities
> > www.parchment.com <http://www.parchment.com/>
> >
> >
> > On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 7:17 AM, Eric Korb <eric.korb@accreditrust.com
> > <mailto:eric.korb@accreditrust.com>> wrote:
> >
> > David,
> >
> > Great question. The JSON-LD model allow us to leverage the
> > OpenBadges - "expire" property found in their vocabulary.
> >
> > ,
> > "http://w3id.org/openbadges/v1expires": [
> > {
> > "@value": "2020-05-05T21:53:01Z"
> > }
> > ],
> >
> > Digital Credential validation tools then need to evaluate the
> property.
> >
> > Eric
> >
> >
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > TrueCred™ | Digital Credential Trust™
> >
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > *Eric R. Korb | Chief Executive Officer | Warren, New Jersey*
> >
> >
> > <https://mail.google.com/>
> >
> > On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 7:13 AM, David Chadwick
> > <d.w.chadwick@kent.ac.uk <mailto:d.w.chadwick@kent.ac.uk>> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Manu
> >
> > Can ask why a verifiable claim does not have an expiry time as a
> > mandatory component? Whilst the attribute itself may not expire
> > e.g. a
> > university degree, nevertheless the electronic representation of
> the
> > claim should have an expiry time due to the inherent weaknesses
> in
> > cryptographic systems and the need to continually increase key
> > sizes,
> > improve algorithms etc.
> >
> > Without an expiry time the issuer may have to keep revocation
> > information for ever.
> >
> > regards
> >
> > David
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
Received on Friday, 20 May 2016 18:20:18 UTC