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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

Improve language/examples around test suite API. #134

Open
wants to merge 7 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Improve language/examples around test suite API. #134

wants to merge 7 commits into from

Conversation

BigBlueHat
Copy link
Member

No description provided.

@BigBlueHat BigBlueHat mentioned this pull request Oct 17, 2024
Closed
PatStLouis
PatStLouis requested changes Oct 17, 2024
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Collaborator

@PatStLouis PatStLouis left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

We might want to change the requirements from verifying an eddsa-rdfc-2022 to processing, this will ensure jose folks can just process the payload without having to verify the proof (which isn't tested here anyways)

README.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
README.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
README.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
TallTed
TallTed requested changes Oct 18, 2024
View reviewed changes
README.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
README.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
README.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
aljones15
aljones15 reviewed Oct 24, 2024
View reviewed changes
README.md Show resolved Hide resolved
BigBlueHat
BigBlueHat commented Nov 4, 2024
View reviewed changes
README.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
TallTed
TallTed reviewed Nov 4, 2024
View reviewed changes
README.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
BigBlueHat
BigBlueHat commented Nov 7, 2024
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member Author

@BigBlueHat BigBlueHat left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@aljones15 would love your thought here on API variations.

README.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
README.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
README.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@BigBlueHat
Copy link
Member Author

@PatStLouis GitHub seems to think I didn't satisfy your requested change. Could you re-review this one?

Thanks!
🎩

PatStLouis
PatStLouis requested changes Nov 18, 2024
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Collaborator

@PatStLouis PatStLouis left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Might as well align with the problemDetails as defined in the specifications

README.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
README.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@BigBlueHat
Copy link
Member Author

Might as well align with the problemDetails as defined in the specifications

We can do that in the README, but does any of the code handle that yet?

@BigBlueHat @PatStLouis
Use problemDetails in place of errors.
603877a 
To match upstream VC API approach.

Per code review feedback from @PatStLouis.

Co-authored-by: Patrick St-Louis <[email protected]>
@BigBlueHat BigBlueHat requested a review from PatStLouis January 7, 2025 19:30
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@PatStLouis PatStLouis PatStLouis approved these changes

@TallTed TallTed TallTed approved these changes

@aljones15 aljones15 Awaiting requested review from aljones15

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
4 participants
@BigBlueHat @aljones15 @TallTed @PatStLouis