Update non-final specs

[c2bo]

Closes #530

Added Fully-specified Algorithms and updated references.

I went through the normative references and we currently have 2 other specs not mentioned here:

• SD-JWT which I think is fine since it is implied by sd-jwt vc and is getting published soon?
• DC API which is intentional as far as I understand and the section is written in a way that we do not normatively depend on the concrete constructions inside that reference?

[Sakurann]

• for SD-JWT, once its published, we would need to change how we reference that spec in opeind4vp, right? to [@!RFCxxxx]
• for DC API, then we need to move this to informative section [W3C.Digital_Credentials_API]
  Caceres, M., Cappalli, T., and S. Goto, "Digital Credentials API", https://w3c-fedid.github.io/digital-credentials/.

[c2bo]

• for SD-JWT, once its published, we would need to change how we reference that spec in opeind4vp, right? to [@!RFCxxxx]
• for DC API, then we need to move this to informative section [W3C.Digital_Credentials_API]
  Caceres, M., Cappalli, T., and S. Goto, "Digital Credentials API", https://w3c-fedid.github.io/digital-credentials/.

Yeah I was wondering about that part for DC API as well - whether that should be a normative reference or informal

[jogu]

I'd just leave the DC API how it is to be honest unless we have a clear reason to make a change.

It's a weird case because the only choice is to do what the browsers actually support. It's not like we can actually tell people they have to use only a particular version, because if browsers don't support that version they have no choice but to use a different version. (As happened with Chrome recently, lots of people were forced to move to the newer version of the spec.)

[Sakurann]

@jogu why keep it in the normative section?