Would there be a standard list for credential_formats_supported?

[Sakurann]

Would be confusing if w3cvp-jwt and vp-jwt and vp_jwt would be used for the same thing..?

[AdamJLemmon]

Yes we definitely need to align, DIF PE included (jwt_vc ), on consistent naming for these things.
Not sure the right place to have that discussion / note the decisions..

[tplooker]

Yes it would be good to have these defined in a registry and managed in IANA

[alenhorvat]

What is your view on:

• different countries have different schemas (for different credentials)
• different countries would probably issue the same VC type (eID, diploma, driver's license, ...) in different format(s)
• should the user get a VC in different formats or should verifiers have the capability to validate all the different formats?

Today we mostly have jwt, ldp; however many existing service are using XML (or other formats)
W3C VC states that the specs are not limited to JSON/JSON-LD.

In the future, we may have other non-w3c VCs/VPs.
Would it make sense to define the format as an object with properties like:

• format (jwt, ldp, XML, ...)
• type or cty (vc, vp)
• version? (should vc/vp version be implicit or explicit?)
  or a combination of
• format
• schema_uri (link to the json or json-ld schema, for example)

What do you think?