Copyright
©
2024
the
Contributors
to
the
Digital
Identities
Credentials
Specification,
published
by
the
Web
Platform
Incubator
Community
Group
under
the
W3C
Community
Contributor
License
Agreement
(CLA)
.
A
human-readable
summary
is
available.
This
document
specifies
an
API
to
allow
user
agents
to
mediate
access
to,
and
representing,
a
verifiably-issued
digital
identity
credential
(e.g.
a
government
issued
digital
driver's
license,
a
passport
issued
by
a
country,
a
student
card
or
diploma
issued
by
a
university,
an
employee
card
issued
by
a
company,
a
passenger's
boarding
pass
issued
by
an
airline,
a
profile
issued
by
an
online
social
network,
membership
cards,
vaccination
records,
etc)
license).
The
API
builds
on
Credential
Management
Level
1
as
a
means
to
request
a
digital
identity
credential
from
the
user
agent
or
underlying
platform.
This specification was published by the Web Platform Incubator Community Group . It is not a W3C Standard nor is it on the W3C Standards Track. Please note that under the W3C Community Contributor License Agreement (CLA) there is a limited opt-out and other conditions apply. Learn more about W3C Community and Business Groups .
This is an unofficial proposal.
GitHub Issues are preferred for discussion of this specification.
TBW
A
digital
representation
of
an
identity
credential
,
such
as
Is
a
digital
driver's
license
or
passport,
embodying
verifiable
claims
about
an
individual's
identity.
Issued
by
a
trusted
issuer
,
it
enables
authenticated
interactions.
Note
Digital
identities
are
represented
as
instances
of
the
DigitalIdentity
interface.
Identity
credential
A
specialized
type
of
credential
corresponding
to
the
real-world
identity
of
a
person
enabling
about
a
verifier
to
make
authentication
decisions
based
on
identity
statements
verifiably
made
by
an
issuer
.
person.
The following items are within the scope of this specification:
The following items are out of scope:
WebIDLpartial dictionary CredentialRequestOptions {
DigitalCredentialRequestOptions
digital
;
};
The
digital
member
allow
for
options
to
configure
the
request
for
a
digital
credential
.
WebIDLdictionary DigitalCredentialRequestOptions
{ sequence<IdentityRequestProvider
> providers
;
};
The
providers
member
is
specify
a
sequence
of
request
protocol
that
can
potentially
be
handled
by
and
structured
request,
which
the
user
agent
MAY
match
against
a
user's
selected
identity
credential
provider
.
The
IdentityRequestProvider
dictionary
is
used
to
specify
a
request
protocol
and
structured
request,
which
the
user
agent
MAY
match
against
a
identity
credential
provider
.
WebIDLdictionary IdentityRequestProvider
{
required DOMString protocol
;
required DOMString request
;
};
The
protocol
member
denotes
the
request
protocol
when
requesting
an
identify
credential.
The
protocol
member's
value
is
be
one
of
the
well-defined
keys
defined
in
9.
Registry
of
protocols
for
requesting
digital
identity
credential
or
any
other
custom
one.
The
request
member
is
the
request
to
be
handled
by
the
user's
selected
identity
credential
provider
.
The
interface
represents
a
conceptual
digital
DigitalIdentity
DigitalCredential
identity
credential
.
WebIDL[Exposed=Window, SecureContext]
interface DigitalCredential
: Credential {
readonly attribute DOMString protocol
;
readonly attribute DOMString data
;
};
The
protocol
member
is
the
request
protocol
that
was
used
to
request
the
identity
digital
credential
.
The
data
member
is
the
credential's
encrypted
data.
The following is the registry of request protocols that are supported by this specification.
It is expected that this registry will be become a W3C registry in the future.
To be included in the registry...
We need to come up with a registry governance and inclusion criteria.
For inclusion, at a minimum, there should be implementation support, and we talked about having some privacy checks too.
User agents MUST support the following request protocols :
Protocol identifier | Description | Specification |
---|---|---|
Coming soon... |
As well as sections marked as non-normative, all authoring guidelines, diagrams, examples, and notes in this specification are non-normative. Everything else in this specification is normative.
The key words MAY and MUST in this document are to be interpreted as described in BCP 14 [ RFC2119 ] [ RFC8174 ] when, and only when, they appear in all capitals, as shown here.
Referenced in:
Referenced in:
Referenced in:
Referenced in:
Referenced in:
Referenced in:
Referenced in:
Referenced in: