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

Re: Expiry time in Data Model

From: Stone, Matt <matt.stone@pearson.com>
Date: Fri, 20 May 2016 12:19:52 -0600
Message-ID: <CA+w1=RSQm_KKhmdnTYtVxKyoMGzJHqhD2hhuKx=T6XKtpUoR2w@mail.gmail.com>
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>
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

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