Feedback requested on updated Data Integrity wallet/verifier metadata in OpenID4VP

Hi!

In OpenID4VP we are updating the verifier metadata definition to indicate
as a Wallet/Verifier which credential formats and algorithms are supported.
Previously for Data Integrity/LDP only a proof type could be indicated,
which doesn't work well with the new `cryptosuite` parameter.

Orie recommended me to share the pull request with the mailing list to get
feedback from the Data Integrity experts.

You can see an example of the proposed new structure in OpenID4VP below.
The proof_type_values indicates the supported proof types, and the
cryptosuite_values optionally allows you to specify supported cryptosuite
values. It's dependent on the proof_type whether cryptosuite is relevant
(so for Ed25519Signature2020 it can be ignored, and proofs will also not
have a cryptosuite parameter).

{
"vp_formats": {
"ldp_vc": {
"proof_type_values": [
"DataIntegrityProof",
"Ed25519Signature2020"
],
"cryptosuite_values": [
"ecdsa-rdfc-2019",
"ecdsa-sd-2023",
"ecdsa-jcs-2019",
"bbs-2023"
]
},
"ldp_vp": {
"proof_type_values": [
"DataIntegrityProof",
"Ed25519Signature2020"
],
"cryptosuite_values": [
"ecdsa-rdfc-2019",
"ecdsa-sd-2023",
"ecdsa-jcs-2019",
"bbs-2023"
]
}
}
}


I have also updated the registry for signature suites from
https://w3c-ccg.github.io/ld-cryptosuite-registry/ (which seems really
outdated) to section 7 of https://www.w3.org/TR/vc-extensions/ (which seem
to contain all modern data integrity suites).

This is the pull request <https://github.com/openid/OpenID4VP/pull/500>, if
you have any feedback or suggestions, please leave a comment on the PR, or
reply to this email.

Thank you!

*Timo Glastra*

*Co-Founder | **Animo Solutions*
https://animo.id