Re: Selective Redaction - docs and examples?

On Mon, Feb 24, 2025 at 10:26 AM Deventer, M.O. (Oskar) van
<oskar.vandeventer@tno.nl> wrote:
> I guess I am missing your point. My point is that "selective redaction" spuriously implies that the holder has any control over what it selectively discloses or redacts during an electronic exchange with a verifier-machine.

Yes, I think I understand your point... and what I'm saying is that
the Holder DOES have control over what it discloses or redacts during
SOME electronic exchange with a Verifier. The Verifier also has
control over whether it will accept the presentation.

We're clearly talking past each other, but I can't see where yet. :P

> I agree that my suggestion has its issues as well. However, if we are going to change a term that has been widely-used in the W3C-CCG community, then let's make sure that we get it right.

+1 to that. :)

I'll also note that the "selective disclosure" ship has probably
already sailed, much to the dismay of some of the people in this
thread. SD-JWT and ecdsa-sd exist and will be global standards soon
(and it's too late to rename them now).

"selective redaction" hasn't shipped yet, so there is still time to
change what we call it, though I admit that I don't find it that
terrible of a name given the other suggestions in the thread.

Remember when it was asserted that "DID" was a terrible acronym
because it refers to "Dissociative Identity Disorder"? ... and that no
one would take DIDs seriously because of the name... but, we seem to
have survived that potential crisis.

Not saying that picking the right term isn't important -- it is...
just noting how difficult it is to get to consensus, as every choice
has its challenges. I'm sensing a ranked choice poll in our collective
future. :P

-- manu

-- 
Manu Sporny - https://www.linkedin.com/in/manusporny/
Founder/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc.
https://www.digitalbazaar.com/

Received on Monday, 24 February 2025 16:46:53 UTC