YarifyStart a conversation

Micro-Credentials software.

Engineering for named requirements, connected systems, and the operational evidence that has to survive after launch.

Standardised doesn't mean static.

The European Learning Model and European Digital Credentials for Learning give micro-credentials, badges and qualifications a standardised, cryptographically verifiable data model — but standardised doesn't mean static: ELM has gone through multiple versions, and a credential issued under an earlier profile still needs to validate correctly against a verifier built for the current one.

A verification API for this space has to handle profile and schema versioning, seal and signature validation, and credential-validity windows as first-class concerns, because the whole point of a digital credential is that a third party — an employer, another institution — can verify it independently years after issuance, not just at the moment it was minted.

That durability requirement is what separates a compliant ELM verifier from a PDF badge with a QR code stapled on: the verification service has to keep validating credentials correctly as issuers rotate signing keys, as the specification itself is revised, and as institutions that issued a credential years ago change systems or shut down entirely.

How Micro-Credentials becomes working software.

Three decisions keep the project grounded in operations from the first workshop onward.

01

Make the requirement testable.

Turn source text, technical standards, and deadlines into explicit product decisions.

02

Fit the systems already in place.

Map owners, data sources, approvals, and failure paths before choosing the software shape.

03

Ship evidence with the feature.

Include the operational trail, documentation, and maintainable architecture the requirement demands.

Show us where the workflow breaks.

If micro-credentials software is on your roadmap, describe what you run today and where the requirement gets stuck. We will map the shortest credible route forward.