- From: Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 2 Apr 2020 19:53:20 +0200
- To: Anthony Ronning <aronning@learningmachine.com>
- Cc: W3C Credentials Community Group <public-credentials@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAKaEYhLkDGtZzMzYoJkrOezj33dszAc+Oe794jU47DjwjpBUTg@mail.gmail.com>
On Thu, 2 Apr 2020 at 19:23, Anthony Ronning <aronning@learningmachine.com> wrote: > Hello all, > > I wanted to get this out there as a potential work item that might provide > value to others in this space. Blockchain-Links, aka Blinks, as a way to > reference blockchain/dlt data in a URI format. > > https://www.blockcerts.org/blockchain-links/ > > Example: > > > blink:bitcoin:mainnet:000000000000000000010382095b5308881ddf0902b59d0328a1401548383c5a:d7a008c9f9eab701132d394410f4e9d578790fb41848013fc5ba35951acdca24 > > Manu had suggested the idea of using this concept for MerkleProof2019 ( > https://w3c-dvcg.github.io/lds-merkle-proof-2019/) so that we could > minimize the size of proofValue using CBOR encoding. This also opens up > the possibility of referencing transactions in fields that are restricted > to URI’s. From my experience, referencing blockchain transactions had > typically been reserved for JSON or are done so in blockchain-specific ways. > > The initial draft is an attempt to get the idea out there and adapt on it > as needed. The idea is to take a similar approach to DID’s (as far as the > DID URI goes) such that the blink:chain-name parameters can be > specialized per blockchain or blink chain creator. It may be beneficial to > have a registry of existing blink chains. > Not a bad idea. It seems quite well thought out. > Some other considerations that might be useful to think through are: > - Hard forks > This is an issue. For example, there are 3 testnets on bitcoin. There are also version numbers, which could change. How is the registry managed. Who decides what the real 'mainnet' is? > - Query/command parameters > - Other possible examples of defining the most common chains such as > bitcoin and ethereum. > > Any thoughts would be appreciated! > The main problem I see with this is that there's no way to dereference the the blink URI Some years ago I came up with a system using RFC 6920 [1] which names hashes. That has the advantage of being standardized already and provides a mechanism to derefernece the block header id, or tx and get more information, similar to a block chain. That info can include the a bunch of information about which net it uses, version, chain and is extensible, and I think could perhaps cover this use case already, unless ive missed something [1] https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6920 > Anthony Ronning > Learning Machine / Hyland Credentials >
Received on Thursday, 2 April 2020 17:53:46 UTC