You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Hi,
it might be out of the scope of this spec, it's not a microservice, but asynchronous issuing is crucial in order to enable:
an approval process - a process that might involve collecting additional information, checks, and even human involvement
optimal infrastructure utilization - e.g. a queue of requests scheduled to be processed on an issuer's terms
To keep this spec simple, perhaps, simply allowing to return 202 Accepted code without specifying any further details, leaving the further interaction details on an implementer for now, could be enough to keep the issuance interface being used for advanced use-cases without a need to introduce a proprietary endpoint on issuer's side.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
I'm going to guess/assume that this issue is primarily about workflows/exchanges. The reason for this is that if they aren't being used for delivery of a credential, then whether an additional process is required can be handled by the coordinator in any way whatsoever prior to making calls to the issuer API. So, we should focus this consideration on workflows/exchanges.
Now, for workflows/exchanges, the current design has some primitives in it already that are thought to cover this sort of situation and others like it. In particular, a VC API exchange does not require any VCs to be returned (issued) when it terminates and it can return a redirectUrl to continue the interaction. I can't link directly to this, but see these sections for redirectUrl:
Therefore, the thought is that, for a process that requires additional interaction / approval prior to issuance the exchange would return a redirectUrl to send a user back to a coordinator website where it can tell the user that their request has been accepted and that they will be notified (by some coordinator+user-determined means) when they can return to be issued any VC(s). In theory, these primitives should enable a number of more complex / interesting flows to be built without having to specialize further.
Hi,
it might be out of the scope of this spec, it's not a microservice, but asynchronous issuing is crucial in order to enable:
To keep this spec simple, perhaps, simply allowing to return
202 Accepted
code without specifying any further details, leaving the further interaction details on an implementer for now, could be enough to keep the issuance interface being used for advanced use-cases without a need to introduce a proprietary endpoint on issuer's side.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: