w3c-ccg / vdl-vocab

Verifiable Driver's License Vocabulary

Verifiable Driver's License Vocabulary

DRAFT / EXPERIMENTAL VOCABULARY

This specification describes a Linked Data vocabulary for asserting ISO18013-compatible Driver's Licenses. It is highly experimental and is not intended for production use.

The purpose of this work item is to demonstrate a path to interoperability between the ISO-18013-5 Mobile Driver's License data model and the W3C Verifiable Credentials ecosystem. The technologies explored in this work item are experimental and meant to be complementary to ISO-18013-5 (mDL) and not a replacement of the standard. The output of the work item would be a Verifiable Driver's License Vocabulary and an interoperability report between issuers and verifiers for Verifiable Driver's License Credentials using the Verifiable Driver's License Vocabulary. This report is generated on a weekly basis.

http://w3id.org/vdl/interop-reports https://github.com/digitalbazaar/vdl-vocab

List Owners

@msporny @tplooker @clehner

Work Item Questions

1. Explain what you are trying to do using no jargon or acronyms.

We are trying to demonstrate that it is possible to express driving credentials in a way that is compatible with the ISO-18013-5 Mobile Driver's License standard in a forum that is open to everyone, patent, and royalty-free. We are trying to address concerns that there is not going to be fair competition in this particular marketplace.

2. How is it done today, and what are the limits of the current practice?

At present, the mDL standard is pay walled and the discussions and decisions made on the standard are not subject to public scrutiny. This technology will affect hundreds of millions of people when deployed around the world and it is currently not being developed in an open standards setting organization. There are a number of proprietary implementation and privacy concerns related to the current mDL standard and this work attempts to provide vetted privacy-preserving alternatives to the current "phone home" nature of the mDL standard.

3. What is new in your approach and why do you think it will be successful?

Our approach is to utilize the W3C Verifiable Credentials standard, privacy-preserving approaches to credential presentation and revocation, and an open and patent and royalty-free process that is accessible to the general public to get industry buy-in on a privacy-respectful path forward. This approach, which involves the general public, was used successfully to build the Web.

4. How are you involving participants from multiple skill sets and global locations in this work item? (Skill sets: technical, design, product, marketing, anthropological, and UX. Global locations: the Americas, APAC, Europe, Middle East.)

We are reaching out to individuals that were involved in the mDL work (local and national governments), individuals involved in privacy analysis that has been critical of the mDL techology (ACLU, EPIC), individuals that were involved in the creation of W3C Verifiable Credentials (VCWG, DIDWG, CCG), and will be making a broad call for participation in each of those groups.

5. What actions are you taking to make this work item accessible to a non-technical audience?

We plan to provide a set of presentations throughout the next year or two that attempt to distill the technology down into easily graspable compare/contrasts between the path mDL is currently on and the alternative that vDL could provide.

vdl-vocab's Issues

Would it make sense to include a selective-disclosure example (frame and VP)?

Or is that stretching the layering/separation of concerns too far? If a selective example makes sense, the 1.1 use cases section could look something like:

• A license-holder needs to present an entire mDL for verification to a foreign government agency while traveling (Example 1)
• An eCommerce website requests just a few pieces of information for verification by presenting a vocabulary-based, privacy preserving request (Example 2), which the same license holder uses to present a verifiable subset of the license contents (Example 3).

Then we throw the frame into Example 2 and the resulting VP into Example 3 and we've made the argument for wrapping mDLs in VCs crystal clear to non-technical skimmers of this document.

Context Not Found

Hi,

The used json-ld context (https://w3id.org/vdl/v1) in the examples of the Unofficial Draft does not exist.
Last time I used it (2-3 months ago) it was fine, so I assume that it was moved somewhere else?
Can you provide the new location?