Re: DID Spec Hardening Proposal V3

Melvin, I like the idea of sites being able to publish a DID via their
HTTP(S) URLs at /.well-known/did/ . It would be easy for a DID resolver to
verify that against a DID document if we established a standard service
endpoint for verifying the association of a website URL with a DID.

Thoughts from others?

On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 12:48 PM, Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com>
wrote:

>
>
> On 22 November 2017 at 09:53, =Drummond Reed <drummond.reed@evernym.com>
> wrote:
>
>> For those W3C Credentials Community Group members who are not taking
>> the Wednesday before Thanksgiving off and would like to attend tomorrow's
>> special DID Spec Closure Call #1, here is the updated DID Spec Hardening
>> Proposal
>> <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1je9Bnhe-1tLgP1bfCSUjvbQ_qllwCz042aGncWX7Uio/edit?usp=sharing>
>> (called V3 because the proposers have iterated it twice based on the
>> feedback received from the first proposal).
>>
>> Reviewing this and contrasting it with the current Working Draft
>> (Decentralized Identifiers V0.7) will be the main topic of tomorrow's call
>> (10AM Pacific Time/1PM Eastern Time—see the invitation emails earlier on
>> the mailing list).
>>
>
> Thanks for sharing this.
>
> I noticed that the http URL where you can dereference the did is in a
> number of places e.g. .identity or the root
>
> It would be easier to create a global web of reputation for indexers,
> software and libraries if this was in a relatively consistent place
>
> Typically, one would use the /.well-known/ pattern similar to
> /.well-known/ni/ used in RFC 6920 it may be possible to use
> /.well-kwown/did/
>
> If that's considered too restrictive perhaps it could be an example or an
> opt in and / or use the rel=canonical pattern if it occurs in more than one
> place
>
> I could picture this eco system getting quickly off the ground it it were
> easy to create reverse indexes and offer services to everyone consuming
> did's
>
> Thoughts?
>
>
>>
>> =Drummond
>>
>
>