If we look at the comments and thumbs up / down reactions in the
original PR in question, I think it's pretty clear what the "predominant
view" is:
https://github.com/oauth-wg/oauth-sd-jwt-vc/pull/251
Markus
On 12/3/24 4:23 PM, Michael Jones wrote:
Thanks for the explanation, Hannes.
For wh
Hi Mike,
as you mentioned relevant is consensus not alleged majority.
Von: Michael Jones
Gesendet: Dienstag, 3. Dezember 2024 16:24
An: Hannes Tschofenig ; oauth@ietf.org
Betreff: [OAUTH-WG] Re: Precipitous unreviewed change
Caution: This email originated from outside of the organization
Thanks for the explanation, Hannes.
For what it's worth, it was my sense that the DID removal was made with rough
consensus of the working group, although there were a few vocal detractors.
When you make the consensus call at or after the virtual interim, as I see it,
the chairs should have th
Hi Mike, Hi everyone,
Rifaat and I requested this change to be made. The PR reverts an earlier
modification to the document that was introduced without working group
consensus.
We plan to use the upcoming virtual interim meeting to discuss the topic
of DID resolution—specifically whether it belo
I concurr. In particular there is an interim scheduled next week on this
draft. (
https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/interim-2024-oauth-07/session/oauth)
it seems very strange not to wait for that meeting before making a change
like this.
On Mon, Dec 2, 2024, 6:01 PM Michael Jones
wrote:
> I’m
