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.

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

clarify that logo_uri can be of multiple schemes #141

Merged
merged 10 commits into from
Jan 4, 2024
Merged

clarify that logo_uri can be of multiple schemes #141

merged 10 commits into from
Jan 4, 2024

Conversation

Sakurann
Copy link
Collaborator

@Sakurann Sakurann commented Dec 9, 2023

resolves #43.

@paulbastian
Copy link
Contributor

As a sidetopic: I wonder why there is a logo for the credential, but not for the issuer?

@peppelinux
Copy link
Member

peppelinux commented Dec 14, 2023

As a sidetopic: I wonder why there is a logo for the credential, but not for the issuer?

Good catch @paulbastian.
Using Federation we have logo_uri in the federation_entity and any other protocol specific metadata, so for who uses openid federation this problem doesn't exist ...

@Sakurann
Copy link
Collaborator Author

I changed the structure to the array as suggested by @danielfett; added a reference to RFC2397 for the data: scheme format; and added a logo parameter for the credential issuer as requested by @paulbastian. please re-review

Copy link
Contributor

@awoie awoie left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I don't think we should introduce media_type and I don't think we should encourage people to use data URIs. This would not be great in terms of performance. IMO, it is fine to have one logo URI, and potentially one URL for the thumbnail. The media type of the image is determined by the HTTP response content-type.

@Sakurann
Copy link
Collaborator Author

@awoie the current PR text does not introduce 'media_types'.

Some want to use data uris and I don't think it is up to us to prevent that.

Without an agreement in the industry on one image format, I don't see a better option than having an array, even if it might end up having one entry in the end.

@Sakurann Sakurann added this to the ID-1 milestone Dec 21, 2023
@awoie
Copy link
Contributor

awoie commented Dec 21, 2023

@awoie the current PR text does not introduce 'media_types'.

Some want to use data uris and I don't think it is up to us to prevent that.

Without an agreement in the industry on one image format, I don't see a better option than having an array, even if it might end up having one entry in the end.

I want to avoid that a wallet has to fetch all logos from the array until the wallet finds a suitable media type. If it is really required to support multiple logos then I support @peppelinux suggestion and we have to include the media type in the metadata to avoid unnecessary fetching of logos of unsupported media types. However, I'm questioning if multiple logos is needed in the first place.

@Sakurann
Copy link
Collaborator Author

for the purpose of this PR, let's stick to making it a string and renaming to uri to prevent breaking changes before ID-1. any other feature suggestions, please open the issue.

@tplooker
Copy link
Contributor

tplooker commented Dec 21, 2023

for the purpose of this PR, let's stick to making it a string and renaming to uri to prevent breaking changes before ID-1. any other feature suggestions, please open the issue.

It doesn't feel like there is consensus on this so its going to be hard to prevent a breaking change. Leaving this feature open to all image formats and both remote and local resolution isn't a solution either, standards are about making decisions and this proposal at the moment is the opposite of a decision. I'm fine with merging the PR but only on the basis that post ID-1 we have agreement to revisit and make it stricter, otherwise we need to resolve it now.

Copy link
Contributor

@awoie awoie left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I'm ok with the data URI since it is not a breaking change. Just explains that URL can contain also a data URI which is fine (although not my preference).

However, the language on the issuer logo has to be removed since this is unrelated. See my comment.

Comment on lines 1849 to 1851
* `logo`: OPTIONAL. A JSON object with information about the logo of the Credential Issuer with a following non-exhaustive list of parameters that MAY be included:
* `uri`: OPTIONAL. String value that contains a URI where the Wallet can obtain a logo of the Credential from the Credential Issuer. Wallet needs to determine the scheme, since the URI value could use `https:` scheme, `data:` scheme, etc.
* `alt_text`: OPTIONAL. String value of an alternative text of a logo image.
Copy link
Contributor

@awoie awoie Dec 22, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Please delete this. This is new and unrelated to #43. If a mechanism for the issuer logo is needed, then this should not be defined format-specific and should rather be a top-level credential issuer metadata parameter.

Suggested change
* `logo`: OPTIONAL. A JSON object with information about the logo of the Credential Issuer with a following non-exhaustive list of parameters that MAY be included:
* `uri`: OPTIONAL. String value that contains a URI where the Wallet can obtain a logo of the Credential from the Credential Issuer. Wallet needs to determine the scheme, since the URI value could use `https:` scheme, `data:` scheme, etc.
* `alt_text`: OPTIONAL. String value of an alternative text of a logo image.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

aaaa good catch. I added this in the wrong place.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

you are right. this was born out of Paul's comment on this PR, and should be in another PR. i removed this from this PR and moved to PR #170

@Sakurann Sakurann requested a review from awoie December 22, 2023 23:32
@Sakurann
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Sakurann commented Jan 4, 2024

I'm fine with merging the PR but only on the basis that post ID-1 we have agreement to revisit and make it stricter, otherwise we need to resolve it now.

sure. @tplooker please open an issue so that we can track it!

@Sakurann Sakurann merged commit 5084a07 into main Jan 4, 2024
2 checks passed
Sakurann added a commit that referenced this pull request Jan 10, 2024
7 approvals. open for more than a week. no objections to merge during the last WG call.

* adding credential issuer logo uri based on PR #141

* Apply editorial suggestions from code review

* make uri required

* typo

Co-authored-by: Joseph Heenan <joseph@heenan.me.uk>

* change logo uri for each credential to be required too

* Apply suggestions from Mike's code review

* Apply suggestions from Mike's code review

Co-authored-by: Michael B. Jones <michael_b_jones@hotmail.com>

---------

Co-authored-by: Kristina <=>
Co-authored-by: Joseph Heenan <joseph@heenan.me.uk>
Co-authored-by: Michael B. Jones <michael_b_jones@hotmail.com>
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.

logo uri in the credentials_supported display metadata
8 participants