W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-credentials@w3.org > December 2017

Re: Worldview conflicts on the purpose of DID documents

From: Dave Longley <dlongley@digitalbazaar.com>
Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2017 10:52:42 -0500
To: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>, public-credentials@w3.org
Message-ID: <92b12550-68ee-0655-0773-b1c95ca549e7@digitalbazaar.com>
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
method.


-- 
Dave Longley
CTO
Digital Bazaar, Inc.
http://digitalbazaar.com
Received on Thursday, 14 December 2017 15:53:15 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:18:17 UTC