Verifiable presentation does not support all government inclusion requirement

[TomCJones]

separated out from issue 333
Any government issued ID must address all persons who would need to access resources controlled by a Digital ID
For example

1. Comatose, severely impaired or young child (Cognitively unable to Consent)
2. Language issues (Communications limitations to give informed consent)
3. Elderly parent that needs assistance (has become dependent; can delegate consent)
4. Other emergency use cases like natural disasters like the North Carolina hurricane.

[Sakurann]

Which specific aspects of the protocol would you like to be changed?
I totally agree we need inclusive and accessible Digital ID systems, but a lot of what is needed to build it is implementation details and not the matter of a technical protocol

[TomCJones]

FIrst: this is not so much a defect to what is included in the spec. Rather it addresses something missing.
Second: this mandate (for that is what is would call it) only applies to government use of the spec.
If i were to design a solution i would create other creds, like delegation, to accompany the OID4VP and those might be developed in some other committee.

[jogu]

For clarity, OpenID Foundation specifications cannot include clauses mandating governments to do anything - this may fall into the remit of lobbying, an activity specifically excluded from OpenID Foundation's bylaws and lobbying would also cause issues with OpenID Foundation's Section 501(c)(6) non-profit status. (I'm not a lawyer so can't say for sure either way, but it seemed worth being clear that there is a boundary in this area that we need to be aware of.)

That said, I definitely encourage people to solve this problem, and the same as Tom I also believe it can be solved without changes to the OID4VP specification.