feat: add signature proof spec #35
Conversation
signature-proof-spec/spec.md
Outdated
|
|
||
| Each of these implementation have various pros and cons and this paper will not go into the details of them. Instead, we would refer to the readers to a paper [3] written by Kaliya young, which goes into the specific details of these various implementations. | ||
|
|
||
| Although contrary to what the above paper hopes to achieves, what we propose is another flavour of a verifiable credential that is expressed in JSON-LD using linked data proofs that leverage on Merkle hash trees that are less complex (as compared to [debatable]) ZKP implementations and more pragmatic in practice [also debatable] [5]. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I would not say it's debatable. ZKP are based on high level mathematics
There was a problem hiding this comment.
yea ZKP is really complex. But why is it the w3c is converging towards that model instead? I tried looking up for severe limitations regarding our solution, but I cant really find any (maybe I am not looking harder).
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Our solution is not ZKP at all. With a ZKP credential, you don't need to disclose any information to make assertions.
For instance let's say we want to know If the issuer of a vc is older than 21. With OA you must disclose the info, for instance the birthdate, but you can hide all the rest. With ZKP you can just get the answer to the question
Regarding But why is it the w3c is converging towards that model instead, I guess it's the end goal, but technology-wise still very complex.
|
Any more comments? otherwise I'll try to export it into a more readable document (pdf or something) |
|
All good |
Is it possible to get a proof read on this??
I've included the full data in the credential, might be wiser to truncate some of it.
Also, I have certain places where I am unsure about, indicated by [??].