Re: Preliminary Credentials Use Cases (Summary)

On 27 August 2014 02:18, Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com> wrote:

> Tim, I'm splitting responses into multiple email threads in an attempt
> to make the responses more manageable.
>
> On 08/25/2014 02:35 AM, Tim Holborn wrote:
> > *SUMMARY* I consider the endeavour set-out by Web Credentials, to be
> > an enormous undertaking.  It is both extraordinarily important; and,
> > a body of work to be carried out in an environment that has otherwise
> > required a plurality solutions for a plurality situations.
> > Underlying the body of work must be a baseline set of ’shared
> > values’, such as respect of human rights, and a belief in the
> > capacity of the endeavour to provide safety for individuals, to our
> > best efforts as contributors to a technical solutions, for real-world
> > problems.
>
> +1
>
> > I note that “identity credentials” in your ‘proposed web-payments
> > specification stack’ is defined as ‘identity credentials (login and
> > preferences)[13]
>
> Yeah, that's not what was intended. I've updated it to hopefully still
> be succinct, but infer that credentials are a part of what we're trying
> to do:
>
>
> https://docs.google.com/drawings/d/17mfHu4EqsnZQ2eFI115qC8FUuLOX-ZSnWpCjo7q1Vlc
>
> > I’ve cc’d WebID - in the hope that participants of WebID join the
> > Credentials Group http://www.w3.org/community/credentials/  in
> > supporting, at a minimum, discourse surrounding the requirements
> > analysis.
>
> I had a chance to sit down and show Stephane Corlosquet and Andrei
> Sambra what the Identity Credentials spec can do during SemTech 2014
> last week. So, there is an ongoing dialog there. For those that don't
> know, Stephane and Andrei edited/authored a number of WebID specs. So I
> do expect that discourse will happen. I also worked closely with
> Stephane on RDFa 1.1, so I'd take that as a positive sign as well.
>
> > Whilst i appreciate that for the purpose of Web-Payments, JSON-LD is
> > required; i do ponder whether other forms of serialisation can also
> > be supported - normalising upon the concept of using methodologies
> > compatible with  (or supportive of?) ‘linked data’.
>
> Yes, other serializations (like NQuads) can be used. Some
> serializations, like TURTLE, are going to be very difficult to get
> working (due to the syntax not supporting graph names). For example, you
> can't digitally sign a graph very easily in TURTLE.
>

Manu, I was wondering if you familiar with TriG?

http://www.w3.org/TR/trig/

Could it solve this use case?


>
> > therefore: - What is the difference between credential and a receipt
> > or document?
>
> A document is a generalized form of credential and receipt. We get more
> specific about what we're talking about as we get more specific about
> the use. For example, credentials are used to prove that you have/hold
> certain abilities. Receipts prove that you have exchanged value for
> something.
>
> Fundamentally, they're more-or-less the same thing, which is why we're
> proposing that the same basic technology stack of JSON-LD + Digital
> Signatures + Secure Messaging are used for both. We have a general
> solution to the problem, we should see how far we can push that before
> having to invent things that are specific to a particular market
> vertical. It's my hope that we can push the market vertical stuff into
> vocabularies, ensuring that the protocol/syntax level stuff stays the
> same across the Web Payments and Credentials work.
>
> -- manu
>
> --
> Manu Sporny (skype: msporny, twitter: manusporny, G+: +Manu Sporny)
> Founder/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc.
> blog: The Marathonic Dawn of Web Payments
> http://manu.sporny.org/2014/dawn-of-web-payments/
>
>