Re: what do DIDs identify? from Christopher Allen on 2019-01-17 (public-credentials@w3.org from January 2019)

From: Christopher Allen <ChristopherA@lifewithalacrity.com>
Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2019 12:44:04 -0800
To: "Michael Herman (Parallelspace)" <mwherman@parallelspace.net>
Cc: Carlos Bruguera <cbruguera@gmail.com>, Tim Bouma <trbouma@gmail.com>, Tom Jones <thomasclinganjones@gmail.com>, "W3C Credentials CG (Public List)" <public-credentials@w3.org>, "daniel.hardman@evernym.com" <daniel.hardman@evernym.com>
Message-ID: <CACrqygDOW+CdEgNrzcA4hyKMG0AjuXTrjQu0awR0UdWjsbLD2A@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Jan 17, 2019 at 11:50 AM Michael Herman (Parallelspace) <
mwherman@parallelspace.net> wrote:

> I’m advocating applying it to specifically to Non-Fungible Entities (see
> principle (P9) in the INDY ARM:
> https://hyperonomy.com/2019/01/13/hyperledger-indy-sovrin-comprehensive-architecture-reference-model-arm/
> ).
>

I like the concept of “non-fungible entities”, in particular for cars with
security tech (may VIN as DID) & chipped pets. But for entities that can’t
prove possession of keys I’m very reluctant to agree that they should have
DIDs, maybe a UUID that you can point to for assertions but that they can’t.

— Christopher Allen

— Christopher Allen

Received on Thursday, 17 January 2019 20:44:38 UTC