Re: Portability Requirement

On 15 March 2016 at 20:31, Dave Longley <dlongley@digitalbazaar.com <mailto:dlongley@digitalbazaar.com>> wrote:
On 03/15/2016 03:00 PM, Melvin Carvalho wrote:


On 15 March 2016 at 19:54, Shane McCarron <shane@halindrome.com <mailto:shane@halindrome.com>
<mailto:shane@halindrome.com <mailto:shane@halindrome.com>>> wrote:

    I am not sure what to say.  I heard a strong requirement from the
    group on the call today that this be included.  As far as I know,
    all this means is that credentials (aka claims) need to have a well
    defined data format that is transportable.  The repository for a
    claim could be a folder fill of .json files on a disk, right?  Or
    some fancy service provider.  The claims and their integrity are not
    dependent upon the repository.


Let me clarify slightly.

If this simply means that the serialization reuses web standards such as
JSON LD and Linked data then im +1, because that's portable by nature.

If it means that the subject of those data structures requires the use a
URI scheme other then HTTP (e.g. the did: scheme) URIs, that's the point
I'd like to push back on.

There is no requirement for that to happen.

To give an example of how this might work with a WebID (but note that no technologies have been chosen yet), suppose that if you have some third party claims about the subject "https://example.com/people#melvin <https://example.com/people#melvin>". You currently store those at "https://credbank.com <https://credbank.com/>", but now you'd like to move them to "https://best.credrepo.com <https://best.credrepo.com/>". You can do that without having the claims reissued. The identifier you use for yourself has nothing to do with it. Your identifier can be *independent* of the services that issue claims to you and so can the repository where you store those claims.

OK, that's fine, so it's just the stuff you get for free using JSON LD.  So long as the subject can be an HTTP URI, that's the key.  The text didnt make it that clear, thanks for the clarification (-1 withdrawn)

However, I do think the portability use case is still a 'slippery slope'.



--
Dave Longley
CTO
Digital Bazaar, Inc.
http://digitalbazaar.com <http://digitalbazaar.com/>