Ownership, representation, and mandates

[eklaver]

• Prove who is authorized to act for a company.
• Delegate legal authority to employees, directors, lawyers, or agents.

[Saramandus]

I would suggest consolidating this with the current section "Roles Supported" to explicitly cover how Wallet Owner/Users, roles and mandates are handled (I am trying to turn the different issues into clear sections that fits with the existing structure).

[Saramandus]

I would like to move some of the content from #84 here, since the EBW definition needs to clarify how an EBW and its legal-entity owner are identified, including whether that identification is persistent and can be referenced after the EBW itself has ceased to exist.

This definition should support use cases where credentials or attestations issued through an EBW need to be associated with the issuing legal entity at a later point in time.

[Saramandus]

From #87 we should also clarify the relationship between EBW owners, EBWs and EBWOIDs.

The EBW definition SHALL clarify that a legal entity may own and operate multiple EBWs and that an EBW may hold multiple EBWOIDs associated with the same legal entity.

Where multiple EBWOIDs represent the same legal entity, the authoritative identity attributes identifying the owner SHALL be consistent.

[wfolkendt]

@Saramandus
If your text
"The EBW definition SHALL clarify that a legal entity may own and operate multiple EBWs and that an EBW may hold multiple EBWOIDs associated with the same legal entity.
Where multiple EBWOIDs represent the same legal entity, the authoritative identity attributes identifying the owner SHALL be consistent."
is part of this issue I agree to close issue #87.

I still have the following questions:

1. Do we need an ADR for this topic, as proposed by Esther?
2. Where do we handle the requirement resulting from ADR EAA provider identity verification based on chaining and TLOL #168 that an EBWOID Provider needs to confirm a public/private key pair ownership by integrating the public key in one of the EBWOID's? Should this be part of this issue?
3. I see a connection to the initial issue "Ownership, representation, and mandates" only if we agree that a confirmed public/private EAA signing key pair is part of this issue.

[Saramandus]

@wfolkendt

1. Yes, a short ADR on this might be useful
2. We need to see the contents of the resulting ADR (in EAA provider identity verification based on chaining and TLOL #168) before making further plans. Opening/reopening issues if needed is easy.
3. No information is lost from Multiple business wallets for one business wallet owne #87 - it will be used for further information and background on this topic. We need to try to consolidate to be able to prioritize the issues in a more efficient manner than has been done until now but I am trying to be careful about referencing the issues that are closed to make sure they can be easily found. The consolidating work is ongoing and I will try to be quick to make sure that we use the time to solve the issues for real instead of just moving them around on the board. :)