Skip to content

Conversation

@surfnet-niels
Copy link

I would like to propose to add a way to provide addition information about the event via a URI. Two real world usecases for this:

I added proposal for "information_uri": an (OPTIONAL) URI that may offer additional information about the event, to the "Event Object Parameters" section and also added two examples based on the use cases above in the example

- **iat**: (REQUIRED) Time when the event is related to, using the time format defined for the `iat` claim.
- **event**: (REQUIRED) String that identifies the event, such as `registration`, `jwks_update`, `metadata_policy_update`, `metadata_update`, or `revocation`.
- **event_description**: (OPTIONAL) String that may offer additional information about the event.
- **information_uri**: (OPTIONAL) URI that may offer additional information about the event.
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

we should say that it SHOULD be an https url, do we agree?

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Yes

@selfissued
Copy link
Member

How is the URI intended to be used? I can imagine all of these possibilities:

  • The URI is an identifier, like trust_mark_type is in OpenID Federation
  • The URI is a URL to a human-readable document, like information_uri is in OpenID Federation
  • The URI is a URL to an image intended for humans, like logo_uri is in OpenID Federation
  • The URI is a URL to a JSON data structure, like jwks_uri is in OpenID Connect

Which ones of these (and ones I may not have thought of) are the intended usage of information_uri? The spec should say.

@surfnet-niels
Copy link
Author

@selfissued I intended it as a human readable document, hence also why I used information_uri, as that has the same function in the core spec

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants