I support removing the DID Document Resolution option from the SD-JWT VC
specification and look forward to a dedicated separate extension on DID
resolution.

Best,
Kristina


On Fri, Sep 12, 2025 at 10:28 AM Andy Barlow <[email protected]> wrote:

> I agree with the removal of the DID Document Resolution option from the
> SD JWT VC specification.
> I look forward to reading a future extension that documents DID resolution.
>
> Cheers,
> Andy Barlow
>
> On Fri, 12 Sep 2025 at 17:54, Rifaat Shekh-Yusef <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> All,
>>
>> This is an official call for getting the WG’s opinion on the last open
>> issue in draft-ietf-oauth-sd-jwt-vc-10 concerning the *removal* of the *DID
>> Document Resolution*.
>>
>> In an early version of the SD-JWT VC document, we had three Issuer-signed
>> JWT Verification Key Validation techniques:
>>
>>    1. JWT VC Issuer Metadata
>>    2. X509 based certificates
>>    3. DID Document Resolution
>>
>>
>> Do you agree with the removal of the DID Document Resolution option from
>> the SD JWT VC specification?
>>
>> Please note that this *does not *prevent future *extensions*. Interested
>> parties are free to define and publish an extension that adds DID Document
>> Resolution support, if desired.
>>
>> Please, reply on the *mailing list *with your preference by *October 3rd*
>> .
>>
>> Regards,
>>  Rifaat & Hannes
>> _______________________________________________
>> OAuth mailing list -- [email protected]
>> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
>>
> _______________________________________________
> OAuth mailing list -- [email protected]
> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
>
_______________________________________________
OAuth mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]

Reply via email to