Closed jyasskin closed 8 months ago
@msporny Thanks for trying. I've rebased, and I think it was just a textual conflict and not a problem with our meanings. It should be good to go.
@jyasskin wrote:
I've rebased, and I think it was just a textual conflict and not a problem with our meanings. It should be good to go.
Great, thank you! ... and thank you for this PR, it's a solid improvement to the interfaces between VCDM, the VC Specs Directory, and the various Data Integrity specs... I'll try to follow it up w/ interface PRs to each of the Data Integrity specs over the coming weeks.
My focus over the next month will be getting VCDM v2.0 and vc-bitstring-status-list into CR... I'll then circle back around to the Data Integrity specs.
Normative, multiple reviews, changes requested and made, no objections, merging.
Both the transform, hash, and proof algorithms that cryptographic suites have to define, and this spec's Verify Proof interface.
This removes the underspecified "proof options" field in favor of saying they're members of the
proof
object for verification, or defined by the input cryptographic suite for signing.I started this on my way to trying to have "verify" also return the verified document", but I decided this was a big enough change to start with.
Apologies for any obvious mistakes I've made here.
Preview | Diff