Skip to content

Conversation

@Wind4Greg
Copy link
Collaborator

@Wind4Greg Wind4Greg commented Jul 19, 2023

This PR addresses issue #78 by adding the expires attribute to the definition of the proof. Note that this term is already defined in the data integrity context.


Preview | Diff

@Wind4Greg Wind4Greg requested a review from msporny as a code owner July 19, 2023 17:49
Copy link
Contributor

@dmitrizagidulin dmitrizagidulin left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

👍
Thanks for adding this, @Wind4Greg.
(I'm not sure whether we should go so far as to say SHOULD, but this is a step in the right direction).

Copy link
Member

@msporny msporny left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Agree with @dmitrizagidulin... this shouldn't be a SHOULD, too strong. Suggest that it's OPTIONAL.

Co-authored-by: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
Co-authored-by: Ted Thibodeau Jr <tthibodeau@openlinksw.com>
Copy link
Member

@iherman iherman left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Note to myself: once #127 and this PR are merged, the new attribute has to be added to the vocabulary.

@msporny
Copy link
Member

msporny commented Jul 28, 2023

Normative, multiple reviews, changes requested and made, no objections, merging.

@msporny msporny merged commit 0f8efe7 into w3c:main Jul 28, 2023
@msporny msporny mentioned this pull request Jul 28, 2023
@Wind4Greg Wind4Greg deleted the expiration-date branch July 29, 2023 21:13
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

7 participants