been digging into how SIGN frames credentials as attestation

been digging into how SIGN frames credentials as attestations instead of uploads, and the shift feels small until you follow how it actually plays out.
in Sign Protocol, a credential is issued as a schema bound attestation, signed by an attestor and anchored on-chain or via indexed storage. verification isn’t passive, verifiers actively check the issuer, revocation status, and whether the schema matches what they trust.
but the part that actually matters is how this feeds usage. in SIGN, eligibility or access depends on these attestations, not wallets, so distribution and permissions inherit the same trust assumptions.
at first glance it looks neutral, but schema design quietly defines outcomes.
if schemas shape validity in SIGN, who decides which schemas become standard?
#SignDigitalSovereignInfra @SignOfficial  $SIGN 
SIGN
0.03208
+1.61%
$SIREN 
SIRENUSDT
دائم
0.57634
-2.54%
$TRUMP 
TRUMP
2.858
-1.03%

.css-1iqe90x{box-sizing:border-box;margin:0;min-width:0;color:#EAECEF;}been digging into how SIGN frames credentials as attestations instead of uploads, and the shift feels small until you follow how it actually plays out.

been digging into how SIGN frames credentials as attestations instead of uploads, and the shift feels small until you follow how it actually plays out.