Re: DID Method requirements (revocability)

On Tue, Jun 12, 2018 at 5:18 PM, Chris Boscolo <chris@boscolo.net> wrote:

> During the W3C call this morning, one issue that was highlighted was
> whether or not a DID needs to support the ability to be revoked in order to
> claim compliance with the standard.
>

Good question, Chris. I can't check right at the moment but I believe we
said it was optional for a DID method to support revocation. So a DID
method specification simply needs to say:

   1. Is revocation supported?
   2. If so, how?

We recommended that any DID method capable of supporting revocation do it
by nulling out the DID document.


>
> This prompted a question for me.  Does anyone know how many of the DID
> methods supported via https://uniresolver.io/ do the revocation check as
> part of the read/verify step?
>

I don't offhand but maybe Markus does?


>
> Also, in re-reading the DID spec, I notice it does not specifically
> mention doing this check during the Read/Verify step.  Would it be worth
> adding some language clarifying that implementors should do this?
>

If the recommended method of revocation is to null out the DID document,
then no additional work is necessary: if the return is a null DID document,
the DID is revoked.

So the revocation check is only necessary if the DID method has a different
way of doing revocation. In which case I would agree that it should be
recommended to check it on resolution.

=Drummond