A useful credential makes a bounded claim: a named issuer says a named person met stated criteria at a defined time.
Issuer
Identify the organization making the claim, not merely the software that generated it. Use a stable provider name and an appropriate public reference. Enrolius hosts the record; the provider is the issuer.
Holder
Include enough identity to connect the credential to its holder while respecting privacy. Full legal names are not always necessary in a public view. Define how identity was checked and how corrections are handled.
Credential type and title
State whether the record is a certificate of completion, professional certification, continuing-education record or digital badge. Give it a precise program title. Avoid labels such as “licensed” or “accredited” unless a named authority supports them.
Criteria and evidence context
Explain what the holder had to do. A concise public summary can link to the program criteria. Private underlying evidence should remain protected.
Issue and expiry dates
The issue date locates the decision in time. Add an expiry date when competence, policy or external rules require renewal. If there is no expiry, say why internally rather than leaving the field ambiguous.
Status
A verifier needs the current state: active, expired, revoked or corrected, as defined by the provider. Do not delete history to create a cleaner appearance.
Identifier and verification route
Use an opaque credential reference and a live verification page. Avoid predictable public database IDs. Enrolius uses opaque tokens for provider-attributed verification.
Optional contextual fields
Programs may add achievement level, continuing-education hours, skill statements or a program version. Include only fields that the provider can support with records.
What should remain private
Do not publish assessment answers, reviewer notes, identity documents, payment data or sensitive evidence simply because they relate to the credential. Public verification and internal audit serve different purposes.
Standards context
W3C Verifiable Credentials 2.0 defines a flexible issuer–holder–verifier data model. 1EdTech Open Badges 3.0 describes achievement credentials with criteria and verification. These are useful design references; a provider should not claim conformance or certification without completing the relevant technical and governance work.
Frequently asked questions
Is a certificate image enough?
It may communicate the achievement, but a live verification record is better for current status and authenticity checks.
Does Enrolius decide the credential wording?
The product supplies credential types and records. The issuer remains responsible for accurate criteria and claims.
Design one honest credential
Start your first certification program free. Create one program and add up to three learners—no credit card and no trial deadline.