OP metadata claims_in_verified_claims_supported and verified_claims_supported

[Dima Postnikov]

Do we need both claims_in_verified_claims_supported and verified_claims_supported? Are these being used?

or we can verified_claims_supported as JSON array containing all Claims supported within `verified_claims` and if there is at least one, then verified_claims is supported….

[Mark Haine]

that has been present in the spec since it was first contributed in December 2019 see commit: https://bitbucket.org/openid/ekyc-ida/commits/6af01265a4a92d4c4a57f2779e7b7d8c5f2f04e5

[Mark Haine]

Comment from Mike Jones that there shouldn’t be a significant problem for existing implementations if there requirement for the verified_claims_supported OP metadata item is dropped from the spec

[Daniel Fett]

I don’t see a problem with dropping verified_claims_supported.

[Dima Postnikov]

How about this: https://bitbucket.org/openid/ekyc-ida/pull-requests/181

[Mark Haine]

addressed by PR#181

[Mark Haine]

resolved by PR#181