search

WebOfTrustInfo / rwot8-barcelona

RWOT8 in Barcelona, Spain (March 2019)
130 stars 101 forks source link

[DID Content References] "!" notation is problematic for a DID Resolver #167

Open mwherman2000 opened 5 years ago

mwherman2000 commented 5 years ago

Consider the following single "Hashlink" example from the paper https://github.com/WebOfTrustInfo/rwot8-barcelona/blob/master/topics-and-advance-readings/DID-Content-References.md ...

did:sov:21tDAKCERh95uGgKbJNHYp!hl:zQmWvQxTqbG2Z9HPJgG57jjwR154cKhbtJenbyYTWkjgF3e

  1. How is a DID Resolver for the "did:sov:" DID method supposed to know what type of JSON document to return for the identifier 21tDAKCERh95uGgKbJNHYp (within the "did:sov:` DID method context)?

Clearly the data for the object as serialized and stored on the ledger will know its object type (via some sort of type or subtype attribute) ...i.e. whether the corresponding object is a DID Document, a Hashlink object, etc.

  1. What if 21tDAKCERh95uGgKbJNHYp is the id for a DID Document and the Resolver is asked to apply the "!" operator to a DID Document instead of an intended Hashlink object? Does the Resolver return some sort of "type mismatch" error diagnostic to the caller?

CC: @talltree @peacekeeper

mwherman2000 commented 5 years ago

In this scenario (same Hashlink example from the paper):

did:sov:21tDAKCERh95uGgKbJNHYp!hl:zQmWvQxTqbG2Z9HPJgG57jjwR154cKhbtJenbyYTWkjgF3e

I propose the following semantics (although at an implementation level, there may be optimizations):

andrewhughes3000 commented 5 years ago

As has been pointed out in other places, this content is not part of the Credentials Community Group DID specification or DID Resolver work. I suggest that you do not use this repo for specification development comments - it is unlikely that contributions here will be preserved for that purpose and equally unlikely that the CCG participants will respond here. If or when anything originating from here emerges in CCG, that will be the place to raise issues etc. I'll leave it to you to decide whether these issues should or should not be here.

Andrew Hughes CISM CISSP In Turn Information Management Consulting

o +1 650.209.7542 m +1 250.888.9474 1249 Palmer Road, Victoria, BC V8P 2H8 AndrewHughes3000@gmail.com https://www.linkedin.com/in/andrew-hughes-682058a https://www.linkedin.com/in/andrew-hughes-682058a Digital Identity | International Standards | Information Security

On Fri, Mar 15, 2019 at 10:13 AM Michael Herman (Toronto) < notifications@github.com> wrote:

In this scenario

did:sov:21tDAKCERh95uGgKbJNHYp!hl:zQmWvQxTqbG2Z9HPJgG57jjwR154cKhbtJenbyYTWkjgF3e

I propose the following semantics (although at an implementation level, there may be optimizations): - that the DID Resolver simply fetch the object that matches did:sov:21tDAKCERh95uGgKbJNHYp on the ledger (if it exists); then the dereferencing operation can be applied.

— You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/WebOfTrustInfo/rwot8-barcelona/issues/167#issuecomment-473370074, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ASYM_HM0z9BAmiGesZgP7keMVB0TKBniks5vW9SqgaJpZM4b2668 .

mwherman2000 commented 5 years ago

I appreciate your comments @andrewhughes3000, I've been simply posting comments in the issues log of the repository where the subject documents are stored ...conventional github operating procedure.

Where do you propose that discussions specific to specific RWOT documents take place?

andrewhughes3000 commented 5 years ago

I don't propose anything - just pointing out a pitfall of material posted here if it is intended to be consumed by a group that is not watching this repo.

Andrew Hughes CISM CISSP In Turn Information Management Consulting

o +1 650.209.7542 m +1 250.888.9474 1249 Palmer Road, Victoria, BC V8P 2H8 AndrewHughes3000@gmail.com https://www.linkedin.com/in/andrew-hughes-682058a https://www.linkedin.com/in/andrew-hughes-682058a Digital Identity | International Standards | Information Security

On Fri, Mar 15, 2019 at 10:27 AM Michael Herman (Toronto) < notifications@github.com> wrote:

I appreciate your comments @andrewhughes3000 https://github.com/andrewhughes3000, I've been simply posting comments in the issues log of the repository where the subject documents are stored ...conventional github operating procedure.

Where do you propose that discussions specific to specific RWOT documents take place?

— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/WebOfTrustInfo/rwot8-barcelona/issues/167#issuecomment-473375027, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ASYM_A_2hHDQRvDwF2hdLm7ubmWY_xIHks5vW9fugaJpZM4b2668 .