Re: DNS -> DIDs -- why not VC embedded in HTML?

I think both approaches have advantages and disadvantages..

For DNS->DID yes you need to be able to update your DNS.
For HTML->DID you need a web server (there may be use cases where you
have a domain name but no web server, or where the DNS service is
considered more reliable than the web server).

Another approach that has been suggested is WebFinger->DID.

For WebFinger->DID you need a web server AND a WebFinger service, but
WebFinger is an already widely used protocol.
Also, unlike the HTML->DID approach it supports email-like identifiers
(acct:user@domain.com), in other words multiple DIDs per domain name.

Markus

On 08/12/2018 01:03 AM, Manu Sporny wrote:
> On 08/11/2018 02:17 PM, Markus Sabadello wrote:
>> - I believe DNS names should only ever be used for initial discovery
>> of a public DID
> Why couldn't you just serve something from the root page of the website.
> Embed a Verifiable Credential stating that "Domain example.com is run by
> did:example:1234." ... hundreds of millions of sites are doing this with
> schema.org today.
>
> Just copy-paste that into the HTML... Google and Microsoft search
> crawlers would just immediately pick up those VCs.
>
> That's not to say that you shouldn't pursue the DNS approach, Markus...
> just that it may be easier for web developers to just dump some JSON-LD
> in their HTML page than it would be to get their organization to update
> their DNS records.
>
> -- manu
>

Received on Sunday, 12 August 2018 05:18:46 UTC