W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-credentials@w3.org > February 2019

[MINUTES] DID Resolution Call - Thu, February 7th 2019

From: Markus Sabadello <markus@danubetech.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2019 18:58:26 +0100
To: W3C Credentials CG <public-credentials@w3.org>
Message-ID: <6dd6f6c2-53bc-d6f6-ea93-669cef96fbe3@danubetech.com>
Here are notes from the kickoff call for the DID Resolution work item,
on Thu, February 7th 2019:





Adrian Gropper, Dave Longley, Dmitri Zagidulin, Jonny Crunch, Kim Duffy,
Markus Sabadello, Michael Herman, Nader Helmy, Paul Knowles, Stephen
Felt, Tom Jones, Victor Grey



*1. Introductions*

Why is everyone on the call and what are your interests.

*2. Mode of operation:*

This is a work item of the W3C Credentials CG.
IPR rules apply, you must be a member of the CG to contribute.
Zoom seems to work for everyone - we will continue to use it.
We will record the Zoom calls.
We will use IRC and the queuing feature.
We will try to use the scribing feature on the next call if possible.
We will have bi-weekly calls at 9pm Vienna = 8pm GMT = 3pm US Eastern =
noon US Pacific.
Jonathan Holt proposed to use Waffle for organizing work around Github

*3. Scope and structure of the DID Resolution spec:*

At this point we are discussing the high-level scope and structure of
the spec, and how it relates to the main DID spec

Some discussion points [please excuse the rough notes, next time we will
try to use the regular scribing feature]:

- Should the DID Document be defined in the main DID spec or DID
Resolution spec. See https://github.com/w3c-ccg/did-resolution/issues/15
- DmitriZ: The DID Document is not an exclusive artifact of DID
Resolution; it can have use outside of resolution.
- DaveL: The draft DID WG Charter covers the data model, the DID
Resolution spec should therefore point to the main DID spec.
- DaveL: This is a common pattern in W3C to separate the data model and
protocol (also see Verifiable Claims WG).
- MarkusS and JonnyC: The data model and syntax are also separate, so
DID Resolution could theoretically return a DID Document in a syntax
that is not JSON-LD.
- Should we define a "DID Resolution Result" data structure, which
includes the DID Document plus additional information about the
resolution process? See https://github.com/w3c-ccg/did-resolution/issues/23
- While the DID Document describes the DID subject, the "DID Resolution
Result" would describe the DID Document and could include validity data,
expiration, and other metadata.
- TomJ: This data structure should be a high priority, under section 4.
- DaveL: An input parameter could be introduced that controls what type
of output you want.
- Is it possible to enumerate all DID Documents on a ledger? This may be
a method-specific feature. See:
- Is it possible to resolve an earlier version of a DID Document? Yes
there seems to be consensus that this should be supported; it may be
method-specific. See: https://github.com/w3c-ccg/did-spec/issues/64,
- How will points of contention of this group be managed? Discussion,
then attempt resolution, we want to achieve consensus.



Thu, February 21st 2019
Received on Monday, 11 February 2019 17:58:54 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 11 February 2019 17:58:55 UTC