Closed quartzjer closed 2 years ago
Ok makes sense - the main reason I asked is because the shifting of the identifier is going to create a new point of differentiation for other methods that will (if history repeats itself) be architected around I'd expect. I see no problems with this design choice but I fully suspect someone will not like it and try to design around it. I'm good with closing this as is and this issue being a point of historical documentation for the design choice.
Yep, good thread, thanks @kdenhartog!
@kdenhartog
I did consider this route, but decided that I wanted to keep the requirements extremely minimal.
The intent is for the owner to maintain these DIDs in their serialized form as the default/simplest use-case. They MAY decide to store in some other form and canonicalize, but that isn't required by the method.