search

w3c / did-wg-charter

https://w3c.github.io/did-wg-charter/
Other
5 stars 6 forks source link

One DID method to rule them all #13

Closed travisleithead closed 2 years ago

travisleithead commented 3 years ago

This is part of the feedback from Microsoft's ballot response to the DID Core spec transition to REC AC review. As it pertains to future work on that spec, @iherman encouraged me to file it here for consideration in the charter process (as applicable). See also w3c/controller-document#115, w3c/did-imp-guide#42

Microsoft would like the Working Group to take the challenge of defining a new fully interoperable DID method that meets industry use cases and can be specified as a mandatory to implement reference method.

peacekeeper commented 3 years ago

The biggest advantage of the DID method concept has been that it is very flexible and can be applied to a wide range of underlying technologies (blockchains, domain names, plain public keys, p2p addresses, etc.)

Another key insight in the DID community has been that DID methods have pros and cons, and that a choice of which DID method to use is difficult and depends on many technical and non-technical parameters.

I think there has been quite some support for defining certain DID methods in a future WG (did:web and did:key have been mentioned several times, as examples of DID methods that are neutral and broadly useful).

But definitely a big -1 to a WG picking a "best" DID method that is specified as "mandatory to implement".

iherman commented 3 years ago

The issue was discussed in a meeting on 2021-08-31

View the transcript ### 6. Next DID WG Charter _See github issue [did-wg-charter#11](https://github.com/w3c/controller-document/issues/115), [did-wg-charter#12](https://github.com/w3c/did-imp-guide/issues/42), [did-wg-charter#13](https://github.com/w3c/did-wg-charter/issues/13)._ > *Brent Zundel:* [https://github.com/w3c/did-wg-charter/issues](https://github.com/w3c/did-wg-charter/issues) **Brent Zundel:** the reason this is a longer topic is due to issues that have been raised that we should discuss … the goal is to go through them briefly, then I encourage WG members to respond in the issues … the first issue is "one foundational key representation please" from Microsoft. … this has received extensive discussion in the WG already **Drummond Reed:** folks are still encouraged to reply in the issue, especially with citations to our earlier discussions of those topics. **Brent Zundel:** Microsoft is recommending non-normative guidance on cross-compatibility between JSON and JSON-LD … this sort of non-normative guidance would, in Brent's opinion, be in scope under the new charter … but would also retrod well-trodden ground … Microsoft would also like the WG to take the challenge to define a universal, mandatory-to-implement DID method … this would take the WG out of maintenance mode **Joe Andrieu:** There was a proposal to include `did:web` and `did:key` in the charter, but that was not done in order to keep it a maintenance WG … so this could be a chance to do that **Kyle Den Hartog:** `did:key` could work, but worried that `did:web` would derail the conversation … and not sure what would be the third **Brent Zundel:** The question of what DID methods could reach consensus would be challenging … `did:peer` might also be a candidate that could reach consensus **Ted Thibodeau Jr.:** Going through the exercise of determining which DID methods could become normative could be a work item for the W3C Credentials Community Group … but the DID Rubric might be a better tool for evaluating this **Drummond Reed:** likes the idea of looking at the DID Rubric and taking an evolutionary path
brentzundel commented 2 years ago

Beginning standardization of DID Methods was added to the charter in w3c/did-wg-charter#20