Closed astanciu closed 1 year ago
The spec could be much, much clearer on this, but essentially...
The point of vc+jwt
is that you don't need to convert from JSON-LD to JSON claimset.
Here is a demo https://jwt.vc
Here is the transforming code, that goes from jwt
, vc+jwt
or vc+ld+jwt
to vc+ld+json
(unidirectional mapping).
https://github.com/transmute-industries/jwt.vc/blob/main/services/token.ts
The group is still discussing many issues related to this, but hopefully we will agree to better text in these sections soon.
type
is RDF Class, this question seems more about the core data model.
Marked pending close over 1 week ago, closing.
type
is RDF Class, this question seems more about the core data model.
Given that `type` is RDF Class
, its value MUST be a URI, not a literal.
examples/vc-2.0/vc-ld-jwt.jose no longer resolves to a file, so I cannot check its actual content, and say what it should decode to contain, but that certainly is not —
"type": [
"VerifiableCredential",
"UniversityDegreeCredential"
],
That should be something more like this, with fully qualified URIs —
"http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type": [
"http://example.com/ontology/VerifiableCredential",
"http://example.com/ontology/UniversityDegreeCredential"
],
See comment here: https://github.com/w3c/vc-data-model/pull/1203#issuecomment-1642405105
I suggest we move discussion regarding expanded form type literals to the vc data model, which has more engaged JSON-LD experts... I will file an issue based on your comment.
Please continue discussion here: https://github.com/w3c/vc-data-model/issues/1206#issue-1812314198
When converting from
vc+ld+jwt
tovc+jwt
, it's not clear how to handle thetype
property of the VCDM.For ex, in the examples folder of this repo, the examples/vc-2.0/vc-ld-jwt.jose decodes to a VC that contains:
The 2.0 version, examples/vc-2.0/vc-jwt.jose, (which presumably is the same VC converted to
vc-jwt
) does not contain any notion of theUniversityDegreeCredential
type.What is the guidance here? When converting to, or constructing, a
vc-jwt
using the new 2.0 spec, should the additional types (beyond the defaultVerifiableCredential
) be included in the jwt as custom claims or something else?