Closed swcurran closed 10 months ago
FYI -- @dhh1128 @dbluhm @TelegramSam @peacekeeper @Jsyro @andrewwhitehead
How about we PDF the current document and put it in the repo. The content is, of course, preserved by the magic of GitHub. We could also tag the version at the commit before the merge of this PR.
If the PDF idea works, I can add that to my PR.
@dhh1128 -- is the PDF and tag idea sufficient? Or do you have another idea? We'd like to get this merged, if possible.
Sorry that I didn't respond earlier. Yes, PDF works great.
I'll just raise a PR that adds the PDF as a different task. Let's get this merged.
Thanks! Just caught me as I was going to do that.
A clean up of the peer:did spec to simplify the spec and in preparation for additional PRs to come in the near future.
This PR removes asperational sections of the spec that have not come to pass, and are not expected to ever come to pass. The biggest removal is the idea that the DID peer method will ever support updates to peer DIDs. Instead, the "Update" process for a peer DID is "DID Rotation", rather than "key rotation". While a general goal of changing the identifier for a DID, in the case of
did:peer
DIDs, this is less of a problem because of how the DID is used -- in a relationship. In most (all?) implementations, the (locally defined) ID of the relationship needs persist, and the DIDs can be easily changed.In removing the major sections of the spec, I've revised the remaining text to remove references to those sections and the concepts they outlined.
By removing the asperational text from the specification, and focusing only on what is "real" in the communities using Peer DIDs, we simplify the DID Method and make it easier for developers to create new implementations as needed.
We anticipate further updates to the specification to simplify it, including:
Signed-off-by: Stephen Curran swcurran@gmail.com