Add vocab definitions for secretKeyJwk and secretKeyMultibase

[dmitrizagidulin]

• Addresses issue privateKeyMultibase vc-di-eddsa#4
• Addresses @OR13's comment https://github.com/w3c/vc-data-integrity/pull/135/files#r1279821900

[OR13]

See also the comments on #135

[msporny]

Minor range fix, otherwise LGTM.

[iherman]

The sec:multibase class does not exist in the current vocabulary (unless I miss it in the maze of PR-s). Note that, for a class, it should be sec:Multibase (ie, capital 'M')

[OR13]

https://github.com/w3c/vc-data-model/blob/main/contexts/credentials/v2#L245

^ related (and in the vocabulary already).

I agree regarding the capitalization

[dlongley]

sec:multibase isn't a class, it's a datatype, like xsd:string. This needs the same consideration as sec:cryptosuiteString.

[dmitrizagidulin]

@iherman @dlongley so, do I need to do anything in this PR, with respect to sec:multibase data type?

[OR13]

sec:multibase isn't a class, it's a datatype, like xsd:string. This needs the same consideration as sec:cryptosuiteString.

Then the capitalization makes sense as is, here is another reference to data types in the v2 context for comparison:

• https://github.com/w3c/vc-data-model/blob/main/contexts/credentials/v2#L62

[iherman]

sec:multibase isn't a class, it's a datatype, like xsd:string. This needs the same consideration as sec:cryptosuiteString.

Ah! O.k., understood; the missing capitalization is fine then. However, just as for cryptosuite, the datatype must be properly defined in the spec and then the vocabulary yml file must be updated.

I would propose that this PR would include the datatype definitions in the spec and when all these types of PRs are merged I will take care of incorporating the datatype definitions into the vocabulary specification itself in a separate PR.

[msporny]

Normative, multiple reviews, changes requested and made, objections clarified until there were no objections remaining, merging.