For the complete documentation index, see llms.txt. This page is also available as Markdown.

Decision Framework for Verifiable Credentials

When governments come to us with questions about Verifiable Credentials, they rarely start with technology. They start with a problem β€” a border crossing that needs to work offline, an agricultural export certificate that takes weeks to verify, a health credential that must protect patient privacy across jurisdictions.

This framework answers the questions our operations team hears most often from countries implementing digital public infrastructure:

  • Which standard fits my use case?

  • Which open-source DPG platform do you recommend?

  • How do these systems interoperate across countries?

We mapped 12 real-world use cases β€” from national ID and education to agriculture traceability, and tourism against the six dominant VC standards and four Digital Public Good platforms:

INJI, CREDEBL, walt.id, and QuarkID.


Resources

πŸ—‚οΈ Standards by Use Case

An interactive reference covering all 13 use cases. Each card shows the recommended standards, the reasoning behind them, and the key technical and regulatory requirements β€” with indicators for privacy, interoperability, adoption maturity, and offline capability.

View Standards by Use Case


πŸ“Š VC Stack Comparison

A detailed technical comparison of INJI, CREDEBL, walt.id, and QuarkID across standards support, credential formats, revocation, offline verification, DID methods, and interoperability.

View VC Stack Comparison


πŸ“„ Decision Cheatsheet

A single-page printable reference. Includes the full DPG Γ— Use Case matrix, the six standards at a glance, critical interoperability gaps, and a quick-guide for platform selection.

View Cheatsheet

Last updated

Was this helpful?