- From: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
- Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2021 14:10:17 -0400
- To: public-credentials@w3.org
On 8/19/21 1:04 PM, Adrian Gropper wrote: > Thank you for the quick and thorough response. I believe the other two > resolutions made that day do not meet the criteria for group consensus. > Should they be removed entirely, as well? Adrian, could you explicitly state which two resolutions you're talking about? On 8/19/21 2:57 PM, Orie Steele wrote: >> Should they be removed entirely, as well? > > Yes, PRs for resolutions that have objections should not be merged. Orie, could you explicitly state which resolutions you're talking about? ---------- To help everyone understand the remaining resolutions we're contemplating, here they are: The VC HTTP API work item group will separate GNAP from OAuth2 until it is clear how much extra work GNAP would add within the scope of the specification. One of the authorization mechanisms defined for the VC-HTTP-API MUST be OAuth 2 Bearer tokens. How a VC HTTP API server validates an authorization token is out of scope. One of the authorization protocols that will be defined for use in the VC-HTTP-API MUST be OAuth 2 Client Credentials. -- manu -- Manu Sporny - https://www.linkedin.com/in/manusporny/ Founder/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc. News: Digital Bazaar Announces New Case Studies (2021) https://www.digitalbazaar.com/
Received on Saturday, 21 August 2021 18:10:37 UTC