+1 to accepting additional VC formats in the VC Directory. I think that was
always the plan.
Ideally, as Kevin Griffin mentioned, there will be implementations that
show interop based on running the W3C VC test suite after the
transformation has been applied.
On Thu, Mar 23, 2023 at 5:04 AM Drummond Reed <Drummond.Reed@gendigital.com>
wrote:
> +1. This is the reality of what makes a big tent. And IMHO will make VC
> 2.0 a much stronger standard.
>
>
>
> *From: *Christopher Allen <ChristopherA@lifewithalacrity.com>
> *Date: *Wednesday, March 22, 2023 at 12:45 PM
> *To: *Orie Steele <orie@transmute.industries>
> *Cc: *Kristina Yasuda <Kristina.Yasuda@microsoft.com>, Manu Sporny <
> msporny@digitalbazaar.com>, W3C VC Working Group <public-vc-wg@w3.org>,
> Mike Jones <michael.jones@microsoft.com>, Personal Sam Smith <
> sam@samuelsmith.org>
> *Subject: *[EXT] Re: Chairs' decision on VC-ACDC Proposal
>
> On Mar 22, 2023 at 12:26:41 PM, Orie Steele <orie@transmute.industries>
> wrote:
>
> vc-acdc should be accepted as a vc format in the vc-specs-dir, as should
> vc-gordion, or vc-cbor-ld... If they define such a mapping to a conformant
> JSON-LD object.
>
>
>
> Perhaps some resolutions on formats would help make this clearer to the
> working group, and remove any doubt that treatment will be applied
> consistently.
>
>
>
> The tent has been made bigger, and W3C is not the only entity that can
> define verifiable credential formats... Even if the W3C defines the base
> media type that is expected to be mapped too.
>
>
>
> +1
>
>
>
> — Christopher Allen
>
>
>