I concur - see above... However I am only asking about what seems to be imprecise language used in the above URL.

I don't think that Schema.org intended to introduce a new entity (and perhaps a new word that the spell checker flags...) called a -- credentialer... but your prose for the entry is as follows:

"EducationalOccupationalCredential
A Schema.org Type
An educational or occupational credential. A diploma, academic degree, certification, qualification, badge, etc., that may be awarded to a person or other entity that meets the requirements defined by the credentialer. "

I think the solution is to use the same construct as all the other entries. I would propose to use the more precise form of:

"An educational or occupational credential. A diploma, academic degree, certification, qualification, or badge awarded as a consequence of successful completion of a specified activity, course or program."

Terminology here is very difficult. Given all the questions around whether the organization defining the requirements is the same as the issuer of the credential (in the W3C VC sense), I like @BrendaBraitling's solution. However, I would rather not emphasise academic routes to credentials (there is enough of that in the example types listed). I would prefer changing the definition to:

"An educational or occupational credential. A diploma, academic degree, certification, qualification, badge, etc., that may be awarded to a person or other entity that meets defined requirements."

@philbarker I concur. Breaking down the silos of education/occupation is essential. I support your revision.

I apologize for the long post, but I must take a moment to air a concern regarding the difficult term ISSUER.

I do NOT advocate for using the term ISSUER to describe an entity that awards credentials,.. Unfortunately the W3C "issuer" -- requires a VC to be transmitted - so it is NOT generalizable to all credentials. See current W3C Link below..

In my experience...
Credentials exist beyond educational and occupational use and answer at least two questions
1. CONTENT - What do you need to know about me? (What is my experience?)
2. AUTHORITY - Says Who? (According to which Authority?)

Credentials can be awarded that are
1. Digital and Verifiable using W3C-VC,
2. Digital and not compliant with W3C-VC Verification
4. Those that are entirely physical because the awarder does not participate in digital credentials.
5. ...There is also the problem of historic or pre-digital awarded credentials.

To support the widest possible range of credentials, I advocate for decoupling the specialized process of certifying-and-awarding a credential from the technical implementation of what happens to the credential externally and downstream.

To be clear, I desire all credentials to be "issued" (W3C-VC) to support sovereign control and VC, but recognize that the majority of credentials at the present time are "awarded" -- because many entities are not yet technologically capable of "issuing."

My position is: All credentials are awarded. Some credentials are issued. Credentials should be issued. Awarders should be Issuers, Awarders should be able to outsource Issuing as a technical implementation.

A cursory search on "award" at Schema.org reveals it is used with frequency across the site. I would recommend clarifying what awarding means in general and perhaps also introduce the specific case of W3C-VC issuing as desirable. This allows progress and backward compatibility to co-exist because: Awarding is a business process, while Issuing is a technical implementation of the Awarding Process.

Thanks for the assist and your attention.
Best Regards.

Issuer Version 2022-0303, Current [Accessed 2023-05-23]
"issuer
A role an [entity] can perform by asserting [claims] about one or more [subjects], creating a [verifiable credential] from these [claims],
and transmitting the [verifiable credential] to a [holder]."