Re: Prioritizing Individual Sovereignty over Interoperability

Thanks Markus - that's helpful, and thanks for the pointer to the issue. I saw that one and should have drilled into it - it was the obvious issue for this topic.

I agree with your assessment.  We (BC Gov) are having a lot of success in working with peer DIDs in the agents we are building and will be sharing at IIW.

Stephen Curran
Principal, Cloud Compass Computing, Inc.
Hyperledger Technical Ambassador

https://cloudcompass.ca  - https://twitter.com/scurranC3I
Calendar: https://calendly.com/swcurran [https://calendly.com/swcurran]
On 4/27/2019 7:41:07 AM, Markus Sabadello <markus@danubetech.com> wrote:
Stephen,
In my opinion, the proposed "did:peer" method fulfills all the key properties of DIDs (decentralized, persistent, cryptographically verifiable, resolvable).
Peer DIDs are self-sovereign, they are under exclusive control of the subject, and they don't require a central authority.
Note that "globally resolvable" is NOT a requirement for DIDs.

Peer DIDs are a perfect example how fully compliant DID methods can exist that don't require a blockchain/DLT (also see this thread [https://github.com/w3c-ccg/did-spec/issues/113]).
Markus

On 4/27/19 4:22 PM, Stephen Curran wrote:

Related to this topic, is the proposed "did:peer" (https://dhh1128.github.io/peer-did-method-spec/index.html [https://dhh1128.github.io/peer-did-method-spec/index.html]) method considered to be in the same non-decentralized camp as "did:facebook" and "did:google"? While I get that "did:peer" is (intentionally) quite different from the globally resolvable did methods rooted in a blockchain, I think it is a crucial component of the decentralized identity landscape.

My thought it is a separate discussion from the "did:facebook" discussion, but one that should be had in the did spec community. If it is part of this topic, I would request commenters consider it so it is not lost in the "bigger tent" debate.

Stephen Curran
Principal, Cloud Compass Computing, Inc.
Hyperledger Technical Ambassador

https://cloudcompass.ca [https://cloudcompass.ca] - https://twitter.com/scurranC3I [https://twitter.com/scurranC3I]
Calendar: https://calendly.com/swcurran [https://calendly.com/swcurran]
On 4/26/2019 11:46:12 AM, Markus Sabadello <markus@danubetech.com> [mailto:markus@danubetech.com] wrote:
Hello list,

In light of the discussions in the W3C CCG, DIF, and recent threads on
GitHub concerning proposed changes to the W3C DID spec (related to
"decentralization" and the "big tent" idea), Joachim Lohkamp (Jolocom),
Kai Wagner (Jolocom), Eugeniu Rusu (Jolocom), Sean Baldwin-Stevenson
(Jolocom) and myself (Danube Tech) have prepared an open statement and
call to action for the community.

https://stories.jolocom.com/prioritizing-individual-sovereignty-over-interoperability-95ec17a36c9b [https://stories.jolocom.com/prioritizing-individual-sovereignty-over-interoperability-95ec17a36c9b]

We invite you to read, share, and add your perspectives on that blog
post with the aim of broadening the discussion and developing a more
comprehensive and rigorous assessment of how to address the challenge of
achieving interoperability without diminishing user sovereignty.

Even though I won't be at IIW, I know sessions around this topic will be
held, and I hope this statement will serve as useful input.

Markus