RE: Towards a global taxonomy for DID methods...

RE: Extending it is devland business, not spec stuff.

That’s where I’m headed/why I asked the question.  Also to validate the spec in real life.

After Addresses and Countries, Cows and Calves are next.

From: Daniel Thompson-Yvetot <drthompsonsmagickindustries@gmail.com>
Sent: August 10, 2019 5:26 PM
To: Michael Herman (Parallelspace) <mwherman@parallelspace.net>
Cc: Credentials Community Group <public-credentials@w3.org>
Subject: Re: Towards a global taxonomy for DID methods...

My thoughts are that we should respect the original intention of JSON-LD and provide baseline mapping entry points. The spec should define requirements for identifying an entity, and I think it does a good job of that. Extending it is devland business, not spec stuff.

On Sun, 11 Aug 2019, 01:10 Michael Herman (Parallelspace), <mwherman@parallelspace.net<mailto:mwherman@parallelspace.net>> wrote:
Take, for example, these 2 classes of (non-fungible) entities where each entity in the class becomes a Subject and DID (Digital Identifier) is created for each Subject:

  *   Countries
  *   [Postal] Addresses

What are examples of a taxonomy of DID Methods that make sense for representing/organizing Countries and Addresses?

did:country:…

did:address:…

What are your thoughts?

MIchael