earlier replies
Replying to @mfosterio @OR13b
Two separate problems. Problem 1 is about intention of the actors. Problem 2 is about semantics of the information. I’m not discounting either, but if we are to work at global scale, they need to be solved as independent problems,
2
4
JOSE supports authenticity and intention, and is used to power most consumer and enterprise identity. 44% of all websites rely on JSON-LD. Both problems have been solved independently. W3C Verifiable Credentials leverage the best solutions for both problems.
2
1
2
That's quite a claim. Are you talking about the JSON-LD that Google recommends people publish for their rich snippets and such? Because I guarantee you about 99.9% of that is treating it as plain JSON.
4
4
w3techs.com/technologies/det…
1
yeah my point stands. The vast majority of publishers publishing JSON-LD on their websites for Google to consume care approximately 0% about the LD part of the JSON-LD, and frankly care about 1% about the JSON part. They just want Google to read the website.
1
5
Your point is it's easy to adopt JSON-LD without understanding its value, and a lot of people have done this?... Are you saying it's a bad thing people adopt things they don't understand? If you're are at IETF let's chat IRL.
2
1
2
I'm saying the LD is irrelevant when most publishers and consumers are ignoring it. It's great the JSON-LD looks mostly like JSON, but IMO the LD part adds very little value. fwiw I was able to implement vaccine QR code VCs without dealing with the LD part too!
7
3
You can implement many "token" schemes without using JSON-LD... If we're really just talking about rebranding tokens to credentials to appeal to a broader base, you don't need a standard to do that imo... You need a marketing department :)
1
They took all the good parts of Verifiable Credentials and turned it into the SmartHealth spec! spec.smarthealth.cards Notice you never need to bring in any JSON-LD library or deal with namespaces or canonicalization, yet it's completely decentralized!
1
3
I reviewed the spec, imo it's a custom JWT format squatting on the branding and work of the W3C... That doesn't mean it's not a great solution to the use case though... It relies on HL7/FHIR for semantics... So it doesn't really need any extensibility model.
2
1
Replying to @OR13b @trbouma @mfosterio
yeah I guess that's one way to put it. Back to the original point though, I would argue that 99.9% of of those examples in the crawl also do not rely on the extensibility model of JSON-LD.

Nov 5, 2022 · 11:54 PM UTC

2
2
Replying to @aaronpk @trbouma @mfosterio
Agreed, they don't rely on it, but they comply with it. Unlike using the DEF header on a JWT payload... Which afaik was invented by smart health cards and isn't documented in any RFCs. But I sure wish it was, because compression is really useful... especially when not using COSE.
2
more replies
Replying to @aaronpk @OR13b @trbouma @mfosterio
If you are just working on credentials for English speaking people. JSON-LD gives you the ability to really be international and readable globally. Semantics and other languages matter.
2