Re: Worldview conflicts on the purpose of DID documents

On 12/13/2017 11:57 PM, Manu Sporny wrote:
> On 12/13/2017 01:38 PM, =Drummond Reed wrote:
>> This necessarily includes specifying how that DID document can be 
>> changed.
> Dave may be being quoted out of context here, but (like Markus) I 
> disagree with the statement above. This is true for Veres One
> because it's a declarative blockchain, but not necessarily true for
> other Blockchains.

To quickly clarify this one point:

The only interoperable place where a user (DID "owner"/"controller") may
express their own desires is in the DID document.

This includes specifying any custom preferences about how the DID
document itself is updated. If a DID method does not permit a user to
express any sort of custom rules for updating a DID document or will not
honor them (for example, expressing rules to allow for social key
recovery via N specific peers) then it is true that any such rules would
always be absent from (or inert in) DID documents that derive from that

Dave Longley
Digital Bazaar, Inc.

Received on Thursday, 14 December 2017 15:53:15 UTC