Skip to content

fix: sync current x401 wire names#7

Merged
frostevent merged 2 commits into
proof:mainfrom
creatornader:fix/current-spec-wire-names
Jun 30, 2026
Merged

fix: sync current x401 wire names#7
frostevent merged 2 commits into
proof:mainfrom
creatornader:fix/current-spec-wire-names

Conversation

@creatornader

@creatornader creatornader commented Jun 28, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Summary

Updates the Node SDK to match the current hosted x401 v0.2.0 wire surface from proof/x401 main.

  • replaces PROOF-REQUIRED / PROOF-PRESENTATION with PROOF-REQUEST / PROOF-RESPONSE and moves verifier diagnostics to PROOF-RESULT
  • replaces presentation_requirements and VP Artifact helpers with credential_requirements.digital and Result Artifact helpers
  • refreshes spec fixtures, the normative ledger, README examples, and conformance mapping from proof/x401 commit 3f73cf912cd05a40bf8de3fe6c1f4bb720341336
  • adds a prepare script so GitHub-pinned installs build dist before a new npm release is published

Checks

  • yarn format:check
  • yarn lint:check
  • yarn typecheck
  • yarn test
  • yarn build
  • yarn publint
  • node scripts/extract-normative.ts

frostevent
frostevent reviewed Jun 29, 2026
View reviewed changes

@frostevent frostevent left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thank you for your contribution 👍

I'm wondering, if you used AI to help you put up this PR, did it leverage https://github.com/proof/x401-node/blob/main/spec/UPGRADING.md and worked seamlessly? Any updates you'd like to see in that file to facilitate future upgrades?

Comment thread spec/conformance.md Outdated
| Token Object `token_type` MUST be `"Bearer"`; `access_token` REQUIRED | `validate.ts` `parseX401TokenObject`; `agent.ts` `buildTokenObject` |
| Error Object `error` REQUIRED | `validate.ts` `parseX401ErrorObject` |
| Token-exchange fixed params (`grant_type`, `subject_token_type`, Bearer) MUST NOT be repeated in the payload | not present in the payload type; set only on the form by `agent.ts` `buildTokenExchangeForm`; verified by `verifier.ts` `parseTokenExchange`. Test: `x401.test.ts` |
| Embedded `<data>`: tag `data`, `value="application/json;x401=proof-required"`, `hidden`, single JSON object that is a valid payload and SHOULD include a `$schema` member = `https://x401.id/spec/schemas/request.json` | `verifier.ts` `embedHtmlData`; `agent.ts` `detectProofRequirement` plus `parseX401Payload`. Test: `x401.test.ts` |

@frostevent frostevent Jun 29, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The specification reads "MUST include a $schema member" https://x401.proof.com/spec/latest/#embedded-proof-requirements-in-html-content.

@frostevent frostevent merged commit 30a620e into proof:main Jun 30, 2026
6 checks passed
@frostevent frostevent mentioned this pull request Jun 30, 2026
Merged
creatornader added a commit to creatornader/atrib that referenced this pull request Jun 30, 2026
@creatornader
feat: use released Proof x401 SDK (#458)
1fa8928 
Repin the private x401 integration fixture to @proof.com/[email protected] and add a Proof VC Common verifier bridge for caller-owned x401 result evidence.

Refresh D134 and the Proof thread map now that proof/x401-node#7 is merged and #18/#20/#21 are closed upstream.
@creatornader

creatornader commented Jul 2, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Thanks again for the review and merge. To answer your upgrade-guide question directly: yes, the PR was AI-assisted. I missed spec/UPGRADING.md in my first pass.

After your review I read it and applied it to a5b7a90. That commit restored the embedded <data> $schema row to MUST, made agent.detectProofRequirement() reject embedded payloads without the exact schema, added the negative test, and added the carrier-specific note to spec/UPGRADING.md.

The lesson I took from this is that the upgrade runbook should be the first step for spec sync work, especially when Appendix C and prose requirements differ by carrier.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@frostevent frostevent frostevent approved these changes

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants

@creatornader @frostevent