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
The json-ld contexts for publicKeyJWK make the value be a rdf:JSON, which cleverly allows the unobtrusive integration of the key as a literal into JSON. But the spec has the range be rdfs:string.
also if you have publicKeyJWK you should also have privateKeyJWK so that we don't need to forever be tied to PEMs, which is the only option offered at the moment for private keys.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
The json-ld contexts for publicKeyJWK make the value be a rdf:JSON
Yes, agreed. We'll do this in a future PR.
msporny
added
ready for pr
This issue is ready to be resolved via a pull request
before CR
This issue needs to be resolved before the Candidate Recommendation phase.
labels
Jul 4, 2023
The json-ld contexts for publicKeyJWK make the value be a rdf:JSON, which cleverly allows the unobtrusive integration of the key as a literal into JSON. But the spec has the range be
rdfs:string
.So in the Http Signature protocol I am developing
I wrote the key in JSON-LD like this
Which I worked out to be equivalent to the following turtle
also if you have
publicKeyJWK
you should also haveprivateKeyJWK
so that we don't need to forever be tied to PEMs, which is the only option offered at the moment for private keys.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: