Closed msporny closed 3 years ago
Editorial, at least one review, changes requested and made, no objections, merging.
I disagree that this PR was "editorial", since it expands the role of the data model in a significant way, and I therefore think that this PR should be reverted while discussions about the data model are happening in https://github.com/w3c/did-core/pull/653, https://github.com/w3c/did-core/pull/654, https://github.com/w3c/did-core/pull/644, and other places.
I disagree that this PR was "editorial", since it expands the role of the data model in a significant way, and I therefore think that this PR should be reverted while discussions about the data model are happening in #653, #654, #644, and other places.
There wasn't a single normative statement that was touched by this PR, so it was (and still is) editorial.
That said, based on the resolutions from the call today, I'll apply those changes in another PR to address the language that you're concerned with based on a tentative WG consensus position.
Preview | Diff