Re: Call for Focal DID Use Cases

So, thanks Manu .. as I wrote that email I recognized the use case didn't specifically say only one DID / organization as you point out below .. however it is good if we are specific about that NOT being the case as there are many that still think this way as it seems "natural".

I think I understand that we need use cases for the W3C process (I'm new to that process) ... what is a bit fuzzy to me is that DIDs are probably not something the people will be normally exposed to in their day to day digital interactions. It is sort of like IP addresses (except many per person and not geo located of course!) in that DIDs are addresses and they are for machines. Should the use cases be a bit more low level in that they could describe the types of peer to peer connections they enable, the ability to have verifiable credentials issued to them, and so forth. Having the DID addressable layer is 100% critical to the goals of being able to exchange trustworthy bits but they are a little under the covers.

I like the characterization of "single long lived identifier / single entity" ... I may borrow that if that is ok (

Best
J


On 2018-06-02, 11:33 AM, "Manu Sporny" <msporny@digitalbazaar.com> wrote:

    On 06/01/2018 03:37 PM, Jordan, John CITZ:EX wrote:
    > I don’t think we need a single identifier like we have been trying to
    > unsuccessfully have in some places for years. I feel like those 
    > numbers are a bad side effect of centralized database primary keys.
    
    Agreed.
    
    > I think the reason I am quite resistant to a single identifier (if 
    > that is what is being contemplated) for an organization is that in 
    > the real world stuff happens.
    
    It was not what was being contemplated nor proposed, but I can see how
    one could interpret the use case as such, so we should make it clear
    that organizations/entities are expected to have more than one DID.
    
    I said an "Organization gets a DID"... that doesn't mean its the /only
    DID/ the organization has.
    
    This group has identified the "single long lived identifier / single
    entity" (e.g. SSN, DUNS, email address for identification) design as a
    privacy concern in the VC spec here:
    
    https://w3c.github.io/vc-data-model/#identifier-based-correlation

    
    and here:
    
    https://w3c.github.io/vc-data-model/#long-lived-identifier-based-correlation

    
    We list the "desirable ecosystem characteristics" that we want here:
    
    https://w3c.github.io/vc-data-model/#use-cases-and-requirements

    
    So the change that needs to be made to the Decentralized Corporate
    Identifiers use case is:
    
    Clarify that organizations will have more than one DID, typically scoped
    appropriately to the interactions that they will perform using the DID.
    
    -- manu
    
    -- 
    Manu Sporny (skype: msporny, twitter: manusporny, G+: +Manu Sporny)
    Founder/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc.
    blog: The State of W3C Web Payments in 2017
    http://manu.sporny.org/2017/w3c-web-payments/

Received on Sunday, 3 June 2018 04:29:47 UTC