Replying to Avatar Leo Wandersleb

Who is using it for what? nostr:npub1qw6sxmwrmwpxqsc8cxty62ujvst6j8pmz8hhtwnv54gpn6dh5c4qms4882 nostr:npub1r709glp0xx2zvgac45wswufjst5xgr7cear5a8me7x9vazhjzmksp2sf7d is this compatible with our verifications/attestations? It sounds like their "attestations" are our "endorsements"?

What are endorsements? Do you have a NIP or some ref docs I can look at.

Attestations are kind agnostic.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

Our "Endorsements" are so much simpler. It's just this event type, but we haven't implemented them yet. We're still thinking on the best way to do it:

https://gitlab.com/walletscrutiny/walletScrutinyCom/-/blob/0b3387bfdfee889daebf604822a935d212d539f8/docs/verifications.md#endorsement

Yep, equivalent. The simplest form of an Attestation is v simple too. All other events in the NIP are optional, as are most of the tags in the base kind.

Would be cool to have you using it also! You would simply use your verification event (30301) as the Subject Event.

My primary interest was to keep this super simple and generic so I can use to attest records that could be relied on as verifiable credentials. I’m a few weeks out on the implementation as I am getting the basic record transmission stuff working (offers, grants, presentations). I’ll then graft on the attestations as per the NIP.

I'll give a look at it in 2 weeks, and we (the team) will talk about it first, but I think we could end up using it. Thanks a lot Nathan!

Hey Nathan,

Is this NIP more or less stable now? Should we expect to have changes to it yet?

Another question. In the event 31871, what's the "d" tag for?

Needs to be addressable and replaceable to support revocations.

I did have revocations as a separate event to begin with, but was steered this way to keep it simpler and have a single event representing the current state.

Ah! Of course! What was I thinking? Thanks!

Pretty stable I think, especially the basics. Tweaks expected as clients implement and we learn what we got wrong.

It would be something like this:

Nice.

Hey Nathan!

Do we have an "oficial" nip for this Attestations spec?

Not in the merged sense.

Community NIPs are the repo now.

Maybe it gets merged one day, but I think the protocol can be more emergent now.