W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-credentials@w3.org > April 2018

Re: "Decentralized Identifiers": Bitcoin Cargo-Culture and Land Grabbing for the Top Level Names

From: Dave Longley <dlongley@digitalbazaar.com>
Date: Wed, 4 Apr 2018 11:32:13 -0400
To: Reto Gmür <reto@factsmission.com>, W3C Credentials CG <public-credentials@w3.org>, W3C Verifiable Credentials Working Group <public-vc-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <a5ad2495-f8aa-e13d-d077-eeb4f8759cfb@digitalbazaar.com>
On 04/04/2018 07:40 AM, Reto Gmür wrote:
> 
> Dave,
> 
> You argue that I misrepresent DID in that it also allows for DHT based methods and that the spec might be adapted to support hash(pubkey) based DIDs.
> 
> But what's left of standardized decentralized identifiers? DID is a URI super scheme that neither fits the URL nor the URN category of URIs, in that it is both a persistent name and allows dereferenciation. My impression is that the 2001 distinction between URLs and URNs is quite obsolete, as HTTP-Range 14 has clarified HTTP URIs can be used to denote any kind of resource. It is also possible (and foreseen in the RFC) to implement decentralized and centralized URN resolver infrastructures.
> 
> So why use:
> 
> did = "did:" method ":" specific-idstring
> 
> rather than the generic URI syntax
> 
> scheme ":" hier-part [ "?" query ] [ "#" fragment ]
> 
> ?

You may be missing some of the picture. Did you attend the CCG DID
taskforce calls or read the minutes? There are some other aspects of the
DID spec that have not yet landed. You will be at a serious disadvantage
for understanding the spec if you are not actively participating in the
group -- at least until the consensus has been translated into spec text.

For example, see some of those proposals are here:

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1aR8V_JUJdq1Sbi47wCV5aa-dEY0e-V2RqwPNP5ci1bg/edit

Please note that service resolution is a very important aspect of DID
architecture -- and referencing services uses a common syntax across DID
methods.

The DID spec is not "complete", it is a work in progress and we welcome
further input. However, implementations for many of its features are
moving forward because what we have so far is useful and because
implementation experience is the best mechanism for ensuring the spec
adequately delivers for use cases.


-- 
Dave Longley
CTO
Digital Bazaar, Inc.
http://digitalbazaar.com
Received on Wednesday, 4 April 2018 15:32:42 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:18:26 UTC