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
Received on Sunday, 11 August 2019 01:45:25 UTC