Re: [w3ctag/design-reviews] Verifiable Credentials Data Model v2.0 (Issue #860)

> Sorry for the delayed response. We @torgo, @hadleybeeman, @hober, @plinss and I) discussed this in one of our calls last week (I've done my best to summarise our feedback here, but please chime in if I got something wrong).
> 
> We noted the change between the 1.1 and 2.0 versions of the data model which restricts the data model expression to compact JSON-LD, with plain JSON compatibility being retained via the (non-normative) [credential type-specific processing](https://w3c.github.io/vc-data-model/#credential-type-specific-processing) mechanism. In general we feel like this is a step in the right direction in terms of mitigating problems with polyglot formats, but we had some concerns about compatibility with generic JSON-LD tooling.
> 
> Specifically, we wanted to know if you can reliably use generic JSON-LD tooling and have the output remain compatible with systems that can only process VCs without full JSON-LD processing (credential type-specific processing). What behaviour have you seen in the wild with generic JSON-LD tooling and VCs?
> 
> There is language [in the specification](https://w3c.github.io/vc-data-model/#json-ld) which looks like it might be to help with this, but it isn't normative. Could you say why you say "document authors are urged to", rather than making this a strict conformance requirement?
> 
> As the 1.1 version of the data model was serialisable as JSON and JSON-LD, we wondered if there were lessons learned in transforming between the two formats that have carried forward to inform the changes for v2.0?
> 
> As discussed in our [closing comment for the TAG review of v1.0](https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/343#issuecomment-531625467), we remain concerned about how much of this ecosystem is outside of the working group's remit. We are limiting the scope of our comments to the data model itself, and they should not be applicable to verifiable credentials more broadly.

@msporny We got an update from the TAG design reviews.

-- 
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/860#issuecomment-1856262742
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.

Message ID: <w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/860/1856262742@github.com>