Skip to content

Corrected JWKs in examples#711

Merged
Sakurann merged 5 commits intoopenid:mainfrom
MichaelFraser99:main
Mar 5, 2026
Merged

Corrected JWKs in examples#711
Sakurann merged 5 commits intoopenid:mainfrom
MichaelFraser99:main

Conversation

@MichaelFraser99
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Raised to address #683

@jogu
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

jogu commented Feb 24, 2026

Thanks Michael - could you apply the change to the 1.0 examples folder too please as we'd want to include this in the errata

@MichaelFraser99
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Yep - updated @jogu

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@fkj fkj left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looks good to me. We should add a change note for the errata of 1.0 about this.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@c2bo c2bo left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Adding a note to document history would be good. looks good otherwise

@Sakurann Sakurann merged commit c003b0b into openid:main Mar 5, 2026
2 checks passed
jogu added a commit to openid-certification/conformance-suite that referenced this pull request Apr 14, 2026
…jected

The OID4VCI 1.0 Final Appendix I example shows
`credential_request_encryption.jwks` as a bare JWK array, which
contradicts the normative text in section 12.2.4 defining it as a JWK
Set (an object with a `keys` array). Spec errata
openid/OpenID4VCI#711 corrects the example. Lock
in the conformance suite's interpretation with a negative fixture so
any future relaxation of the schema is caught.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants