DID = Base IRI? - Githubissues

w3c / did-resolution

RELEASED DRAFT: Decentralized Identifier Resolution (DID Resolution) 0.2 Specification

https://w3c.github.io/did-resolution/

Other

18 stars 9 forks source link

DID = Base IRI? #9

Closed peacekeeper closed 1 month ago

peacekeeper commented 6 years ago

DID Resolution returns a DID Document, which is JSON-LD. While parsing JSON-LD, we could specify that the Base IRI is set to the original DID that is being resolved. This would enable easy use of relative IRIs in the DID Document.

mwherman2000 commented 5 years ago

IRI? ...it's not defined in the current spec.

peacekeeper commented 5 years ago

Internationalized Resource Identifier (= internationalized version of URI), see https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3987

peacekeeper commented 5 years ago

While parsing JSON-LD, we could specify that the Base IRI is set to the original DID that is being resolved.

A slightly different and perhaps better idea is that the Base IRI is set to the value of the id property of the DID Document. See comment here https://github.com/w3c-ccg/did-spec/issues/97#issuecomment-511684511.

talltree commented 5 years ago

@peacekeeper I like that last idea. However I'm wondering if we can't skip IRI and just use URI, i.e., RFC 3986, since the syntax of DIDs is so restricted anyway (on purpose—to avoid some of the very complex string matching rules involved with IRIs vs. URIs). Thoughts?

peacekeeper commented 5 years ago

@talltree Hmm "Base IRI" is the term used by the JSON-LD spec, so I thought we'd stick with that..?

talltree commented 5 years ago

@peacekeeper While I understand that, I believe the DID spec should specify DID syntax is restricted to RFC 3986 URI syntax (not RFC 3987 IRI syntax) because:

DIDs are not intended to be human-friendly identifiers so we don't need the features of IRIs
URIs are easier than IRIs to do string comparisons on to determine equivalence
We have already tightly restricted the syntax of DIDs to make comparison (and human transcription) easier and avoid homonym attacks.

Make sense?

peacekeeper commented 5 years ago

I think that's fine.. Since URIs are also IRIs that would still be compatible with JSON-LD.

peacekeeper commented 4 years ago

This is being discussed in https://github.com/w3c/did-core/pull/408.

peacekeeper commented 4 years ago

Also see discussion in https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues/432.

peacekeeper commented 2 months ago

I believe that this issue can be closed, since the question of the Base IRI has been addressed in DID Core, e.g. in the section about Relative DID URLs.

peacekeeper commented 1 month ago

Closing, as discussed in today's DID WG meeting.