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

Query on HashLinks #1038

Closed
sumanair opened this issue Feb 13, 2023 · 4 comments
Closed

Query on HashLinks #1038

sumanair opened this issue Feb 13, 2023 · 4 comments
Assignees
Labels
pending close Close if no objection within 7 days question

Comments

@sumanair
Copy link

Hi all,
Ref #135
The vc-data-model has a Content Integrity Protection section with some recommendations https://www.w3.org/TR/vc-data-model/#content-integrity-protection. I am coming across some scenarios where the clients may prefer to host the referenced artifact - whether it is a credential or an image / document, and IPFS may not always be appropriate. I was looking at the HASHLINK reference.
I see that the https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-sporny-hashlink-07 seems to be an expired internet draft. I was curious to know where that effort is headed and if it is still the recommendation for the vc-data-model.

@Sakurann
Copy link
Contributor

might be a related issue #831

@OR13
Copy link
Contributor

OR13 commented Apr 11, 2023

Suggest closing, we don't need to comment on hashlinks.

@Sakurann Sakurann added the pending close Close if no objection within 7 days label Apr 11, 2023
@msporny
Copy link
Member

msporny commented Apr 11, 2023

I see that the https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-sporny-hashlink-07 seems to be an expired internet draft. I was curious to know where that effort is headed and if it is still the recommendation for the vc-data-model.

Hi, I'm the Editor of that independent draft... the work continues, but there isn't strong enough demand to standardize it at this point in time. I'll keep it going, but using it at this point is experimental.

It's not ready to be added in any sort of normative capacity in this specification, so we're marking it pending close for now, we might revisit it during the VC 3.0 work.

@brentzundel
Copy link
Member

No objections since being marked pending close, closing.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
pending close Close if no objection within 7 days question
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

6 participants
@msporny @sumanair @OR13 @brentzundel @Sakurann and others