Re: Future-proofing VCs via multiple signatures

Manu, the proof chain example here
https://w3c-ccg.github.io/data-integrity-spec/#multiple-proofs leaves me a
bit confused.

It talks about the proofChain key in the VC but doesn't go into much detail
about it and the example looks the same as the proof set to me.. Could you
explain what that key is?

Thanks,
Brian

On Fri, Jan 7, 2022 at 2:39 PM Michael Herman (Trusted Digital Web) <
mwherman@parallelspace.net> wrote:

> My suggestion has nothing to do with VPs ...no intended connection. There
> may be similarities but it's not intended.
>
> Also, to apply a "proof on top of another proof", consider using nested
> verifiable/structured credentials where the subject credential is nested in
> its entirety as a claim inside the credentialSubject of the outer
> credential/outer proof.
>
> Michael
>
> Get Outlook for Android <https://aka.ms/AAb9ysg>
> ------------------------------
> *From:* Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
> *Sent:* Friday, January 7, 2022 11:12:43 AM
> *To:* public-credentials@w3.org <public-credentials@w3.org>
> *Subject:* Re: Future-proofing VCs via multiple signatures
>
> On 1/6/22 1:37 PM, Michael Herman (Trusted Digital Web) wrote:
> > Consider adopting the Structured Credential Envelope model
>
> Doing so would conflate VCs with VPs, wouldn't it?
>
> We are talking about a set of signatures on a VC.
>
> A set of signatures on a VP is something else entirely.
>
> -- 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/
>
>
>