- From: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
- Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2017 15:52:14 -0400
- To: Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com>
- Cc: W3C Credentials CG <public-credentials@w3.org>
On 10/16/2017 10:58 AM, Melvin Carvalho wrote: > Why would that want to be removed? There were a few folks from the Bitcoin BTCR DID camp that asserted that you can assume who the key owner is if the key is listed in the DID Document, which I believe is true (without putting much thought into it). The downside, of course, is that not listing the key owner is incompatible with all the Linked Data Signature libraries. There are systems, such as HTTP URL-based ones, where you MUST provide the owner (to create the bi-directional link between the site that the key is published on and the site that hosts the triples for the owner of the key). A compromise would be to inject the owner before sending the key into the LDS libs, or to just be okay with a common format across all DID Documents. I suggested that the BTCR folks don't break from this pattern as it'll make BTCR-specific implementations more difficult with the only upside being the saving of a few tens of bytes of data. -- manu -- Manu Sporny (skype: msporny, twitter: manusporny, G+: +Manu Sporny) Founder/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc. blog: Rebalancing How the Web is Built http://manu.sporny.org/2016/rebalancing/
Received on Monday, 16 October 2017 19:52:38 UTC