Content of signed_metadata vs REQUIRED fields in unsigned metadata
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- No language data
- Stars
- 125
- Forks
- 41
- PR merge metrics
- No merged PRs in 30d
Description
It is written in signed_metadata description that "If the Credential Issuer wants to enforce use of signed metadata, it omits the respective metadata parameters from the unsigned part of the Credential Issuer metadata". However, there are 3 attributes marked as REQUIRED in unsigned part (credential_issuer, credential_endpoint and credential_configurations_supported) so it is not possible to omit them without potentially breaking some metadata validators.
Maybe solution would be to clarify that these 3 attributes are "REQUIRED if signed_metadata attribute is not present"?
Contributor guide
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
Research direction
Review the signed_metadata description and the three REQUIRED unsigned metadata attributes named in the issue. Determine how the specification should state their relationship, then update the relevant specification text so the requirement is unambiguous and verify that the proposed wording does not conflict with metadata validation expectations.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Domain
- documentation
- Issue type
- Documentation
- Difficulty
- 2/5
- Estimated time
- 1-3 hours
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Mostly clear
- Newbie friendliness
- 45/100