search

w3c / vc-data-integrity

W3C Data Integrity Specification
https://w3c.github.io/vc-data-integrity/
Other
42 stars 18 forks source link

need resourceIntegrity in vocab and under w3c #193

Closed mprorock closed 8 months ago

mprorock commented 1 year ago

per pr w3c/vc-data-model#1140 need resourceIntegrity in the the right spots in vocab, etc.

@OR13 for more color commentary if needed

iherman commented 1 year ago

The issue was discussed in a meeting on 2023-07-05

View the transcript #### 2.1. need resourceIntegrity in vocab and under w3c (issue vc-data-model#1152) _See github issue [vc-data-model#1152](https://github.com/w3c/vc-data-integrity/issues/193)._ **Manu Sporny:** This is definitely pre-candidate rec. **Michael Prorock:** I'm fine raising the PR. I may be delayed two weeks due to travel.
OR13 commented 1 year ago

@iherman perhaps you can assist?

iherman commented 1 year ago

The issue was discussed in a meeting on 2023-08-30

View the transcript #### 4.1. need resourceIntegrity in vocab and under w3c (issue vc-data-model#1152) _See github issue [vc-data-model#1152](https://github.com/w3c/vc-data-integrity/issues/193)._ **Brent Zundel:** Raised by Mike Prorock. Ready for PR. **Michael Prorock:** I thought we were going to get some guidance from Ivan, but maybe I'm misremembering. … it's ready for PR. I'll try to get to it. **Sebastian Crane:** is this the same a w3c/vc-data-model#1261. **Manu Sporny:** no. **Brent Zundel:** no. **Michael Prorock:** no. different. > *Manu Sporny:* This should be an easy one -- fairly straight-forward PR. **Brent Zundel:** the resource integrity is literally adding that term to the vocabulary (rather than integrity of the vocabulary).
iherman commented 1 year ago

Oops. Coming back from my short holidays, I took the various new issues/comments in a fairly random order... I have run into the same issue while answering another issue, see https://github.com/w3c/vc-data-model/issues/1265#issuecomment-1705009825.

TL;DR: I believe the vocabulary misses two properties:

  • digestSRI's domain is any Resource (but not a BNode), range is, at first approximation, xsd:string (ideally, a datatype that describes exactly what the value looks like).
  • mediaType's domain is any Resource (but not a BNode), range is, at first approximation, xsd:string (ideally, a datatype that describes exactly the media type string).

These two properties are not only missing from the vocabulary, but also missing from the context!

Note that, for the mediaType, an alternative would be to use the term encodingFormat instead, referring to http://schema.org/encodingFormat. Do not reinvent the wheel, and all that... That would mean just add an entry to the context file, and this property is oblivious to the vocabulary.

Do I understand the question right, @mprorock @OR13 ?

OR13 commented 1 year ago

Yep, the need to be added to both, I would do best effort on domain and range, but he key part is that they appear in the context, or they won't benefit the core data models semantics value proposition.

msporny commented 8 months ago

Looks like these things exist now:

https://www.w3.org/2018/credentials/#relatedResource https://www.w3.org/2018/credentials/#digestSRI https://www.w3.org/2018/credentials/#sriString https://schema.org/encodingFormat

Closing.