This profile is intended to mitigate the privacy consideration risk that is identified in UMA Grant Sec 6.2, "Requesting Party Information at the Authorization Server". Alec saw that consideration and decided not to implement PCTs. That consideration is basically saying, "Do the right thing in the case of having to deal with IAM personal data risks." The alternative that this profile is intended to make possible is that the AS is able to persist only what an SSI verifier would need to persist in the case of handling VCs. Is that anything at all, or nothing?
eIDAS has been listing, and Anil John has been working on, "universal verifiers". What does that mean?
Conformance testing project update
Eve was unfortunately too slammed to make progress on this!
Scheduling and chairing help
Should we consider going to a weekly schedule to make faster progress?
Eve could use some help with running meetings.
As of 17 Feb 2020, quorum is 5 of 8. (Domenico, Peter, Sal, Thomas, Andi, Maciej, Eve, Mike)