Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

add intent to retain to claims query in DCQL #338

Open
wants to merge 4 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

Sakurann
Copy link
Collaborator

resolves #321

@Sakurann Sakurann changed the title add intent to retain to claims query add intent to retain to claims query in DCQL Nov 20, 2024
@Sakurann Sakurann requested a review from danielfett November 21, 2024 15:39
@Sakurann Sakurann added the ISO? label Nov 28, 2024
Copy link
Contributor

@paulbastian paulbastian left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'm not in favor of adding this and I think there have been good reasons/argumentations in the Issue. In short, the feature as-is is under-specified and likely of not much use and it seems more reasonable to convey this via the purpose field.

@Sakurann
Copy link
Collaborator Author

WG discussion: agreement that this is not perfect (PR text should be improved), but probably good enough as a starting point to meet the requirements and have a transition path for those who us intent_to_retain in 18013-5/PE.

@nemqe
Copy link
Contributor

nemqe commented Dec 19, 2024

A potential issue I see is that if this option is added in this form it will probably need to be maintained in the version it is introduced as it could be a breaking change to remove it. (maybe a parallel mechanism can be introduced that could be marked as preferred in 1.1? something like PEX vs DCQL)

Other than that if the group is short on time and this option is required it may be a good compromise until a better mechanism is found.

@Sakurann Sakurann added ISO_VirtualMeeting relevant for ISO OID4VP mdoc profile over DC API and removed ISO? labels Jan 13, 2025
@Sakurann Sakurann requested a review from paulbastian January 14, 2025 13:13
@Sakurann
Copy link
Collaborator Author

if this option is added in this form it will probably need to be maintained in the version it is introduced as it could be a breaking change to remove it

the feature is optional. I don't think we plan to remove it, but if we come up with a better mechanism in v1.1 in the future, we can recommend that feature over intent_to_retain.

another option I considered when doing PR is to add intent_to_retain only to mdocs, but that did not feel in sprit of the specification, or the discussions we have been having..

@@ -744,6 +744,9 @@ within the Verifiable Credential, as defined in (#claims_path_pointer).
If the `values` property is present, the Wallet SHOULD return the claim only if the
type and value of the claim both match for at least one of the elements in the array. Details of the processing rules are defined in (#selecting_claims).

`intent_to_retain`
: OPTIONAL. A boolean that indicates the Verifier intends to store the Claim's data that is being requested beyond the processing of the response. For example, to meet regulatory requirements of retaining records of transactions or to maintain user profiles. If omitted, the default value is `false`.
Copy link
Collaborator Author

@Sakurann Sakurann Jan 16, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
: OPTIONAL. A boolean that indicates the Verifier intends to store the Claim's data that is being requested beyond the processing of the response. For example, to meet regulatory requirements of retaining records of transactions or to maintain user profiles. If omitted, the default value is `false`.
: OPTIONAL. A boolean that indicates the Verifier intends to store the Claim's data that is being requested beyond the processing of the response. For example, to inform the holder what happens to the data after it is released.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

@Sakurann Sakurann Jan 16, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

`+ move it to the mdoc section as a starting point. and for the definition, point to ISO 18013-5 section X

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
ISO_VirtualMeeting relevant for ISO OID4VP mdoc profile over DC API
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Add intent_to_retain to DCQL
4 participants