Re: Announcement: New DID Method Specification: did:object

Stepping in as Co-Chair.

I would like to remind everyone that the work of DID Core occurs under the
DID WG. If there are concerns with the decisions of the work in the DID WG,
there is a process to raise those concerns in that WG. It's not really
appropriate to raise these concerns here.

If you want to work on a DID method, you can propose a work item in the CCG
and if it fulfills the requirements it will be approved.

I would also like to remind everyone, that the 1.0 version of anything
rarely satisfies everyones desires (the mobile driver's license is a case
in point). The purpose of our community and the work we do here is to make
progress, release it, and revisit it when appropriate. This is the process
we follow with the VC-Maint WG as well. This is how we continue the slow
march forward.

Cheers,

-Heather
CCG Co-Chair

On Sun, Dec 19, 2021 at 6:16 PM Michael Herman (Trusted Digital Web) <
mwherman@parallelspace.net> wrote:

> RE: define a different DID:object Method that is meant to run in other
> contexts?
>
> There is one and only one did:object Method ...period ...as defined by its
> specification.
>
> ..there can however exist more than one implementation of the d:d:object
> DID Method specification ... different o/s platforms, different
> implementation languages,  different VDRs, ...all supporting the same
> compliant abstract interfaces and expected behaviors. ...the same way
> there are multiple diverse implementations of DNS and multiple diverse ways
> of configuring a particular parent domain. Reference:
> https://hyperonomy.com/2019/01/02/dns-domain-name-service-a-detailed-high-level-overview/
>
> A DID Method specification is really a DID API *specification*/object
> model *specification* for Developers to program against DID Identifiers and
> the associated DID Document. This is the core of the GitHub issue I
> referenced earlier.
>
> The fact that this isn't clear in the DID-CORE and DID Registries
> specifications is serious enough to not have the W3C accept/ratify these
> specifications.
>
> DID-CORE in my opinion needs to be rolled back into the WG. In its current
> state, I believe it is a waste of resources to pursue the Formal Objections
> process at this time.
>
> Lastly, while I'm on the soapbox, I don't know the origins or approval
> processes for the content of this Objections FAQ, but it doesn't include my
> input as one of the first responders to Tanker's email. I don't see how it
> can be positioned as the perspective of the CCG community. I, for one, am
> not about to use any of the TDW DID Methods as bargaining chips.
>
> Michael Herman
> Founder
> Trusted Digital Web
>
> Get Outlook for Android <https://aka.ms/AAb9ysg>
> ------------------------------
> *From:* Steven Rowat <steven_rowat@sunshine.net>
> *Sent:* Sunday, December 19, 2021 2:41:09 PM
> *To:* Michael Herman (Trusted Digital Web) <mwherman@parallelspace.net>;
> Brian Richter <brian@aviary.tech>
> *Cc:* W3C Credentials CG (Public List) <public-credentials@w3.org>
> *Subject:* Re: Announcement: New DID Method Specification: did:object
>
> On 2021-12-19 12:50 pm, Michael Herman (Trusted Digital Web) wrote:
>
>
> Only the reference implementation, i.e. the Trusted Digital Web platform,
> is implemented using the Microsoft tool set. …perhaps, I should have left
> this Appendix out of the specification all together. I was simply being
> transparent.
>
> Aha, I see I didn't understand that DID:object can be used without it
> being part of the "Trusted Digital Web" platform. That was just part of
> your 'Background' for a reference implementation...then?
>
> Oh, but wait, I now see in the DID:object Method spec itself, you say that
> it's for the "Trusted Digital Web":
>
> "The primary audience for this DID Method specification is Implementors
> of apps, agents, and services on the Trusted Digital Web;"
>
> And in fact "Trusted Digital Web" is in the title, and used 23 times in
> the spec.
>
> And so I got confused?
>
> And I'm still confused.
>
> To try to clarify:
>
> Does this mean that your DID:object spec is only applicable for "Trusted
> Digital Web", but that other people can, if they like, define a different
> DID:object Method that is meant to run in other contexts?
>
> And that you're not saying anything about how those DID:object Methods
> would be constructed?
>
> ?
>
> Steven Rowat
>
>
>
>
>
> Developers will be able to use any tools and technologies they would like
> to build apps, agents, and services that run on the Trusted Digital Web.
> All will remain open source licensed under the MIT license (as it is now).
>
>
>
> In the end, I’m going through the DID Method Registry application process
> as a bit of a test as well as a courtesy.  There are no requirements for
> any Developer to register any DID Method but I decided to go through the
> process anyway.  Today, I submitted 2 more DID Method Specifications that
> are core to the Trusted Digital Web: did:bizdoc and did:bizproc.  Some
> background here:
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IuEew7rH5gw&list=PLU-rWqHm5p45dzXF2LJZjuNVJrOUR6DaD&index=3
> (4.5 minutes).
>
>
>
> To the best of my knowledge, I have publicly documented, in detail, more
> about the Trusted Digital Web than I’ve seen for any other decentralized
> platform on the planet.  I’ve been a core influencer when it came to making
> sure that all types of objects (not just people and organizations) are
> represented as first-class objects in virtually all of the standards
> related to decentralized technology …and very openly advocated for their
> broad use.
>
>
>
> Steve, if you don’t like the Microsoft developer platform, tools, and/or
> technologies, I don’t think your sentiments belong on this mailing list IMO.
>
>
>
> I **really** don’t like JavaScript, JSON_LD, etc. and I tolerate JSON but
> you don’t see me complaining about it, do you?
>
>
>
> I’m interested to see where all of this “openness” leads to …seriously.
>
>
>
> Michael Herman
>
> Founder
>
> Trusted Digital Web
>
>
>
> p.s. There is at least one other large commercial decentralized platform
> built with .NET technologies for fear that you might attack them too.
>
>
>
> *From:* Steven Rowat <steven_rowat@sunshine.net>
> <steven_rowat@sunshine.net>
> *Sent:* Sunday, December 19, 2021 11:00 AM
> *To:* Michael Herman (Trusted Digital Web) <mwherman@parallelspace.net>
> <mwherman@parallelspace.net>; Brian Richter <brian@aviary.tech>
> <brian@aviary.tech>
> *Cc:* W3C Credentials CG (Public List) <public-credentials@w3.org>
> <public-credentials@w3.org>
> *Subject:* Re: Announcement: New DID Method Specification: did:object
>
>
>
> On 2021-12-17 8:44 pm, Michael Herman (Trusted Digital Web) wrote:
>
> The #didobject #DID #Method is approved for acceptance into the @w3c #DID
> #Method #Registry. 4/4.
>
> Thank you reviewers and everyone who has put up with all my questions over
> the past 4 years. This is a big deal/day for me.
>
>
> https://github.com/mwherman2000/TrustedDigitalWeb/blob/master/specifications/did-methods/did-object-1-5-0.md#appendix-b-background
>
> This link specifies that developing with the "DID:object" Method will
> require several Microsoft programming tools: "Microsoft Visual Basic", the
> ".NET Core Framework", and "Microsoft Common Language Runtime".
>
> And that DID:object is a core part of the "Trusted Digital Web" which "is
> envisioned to be the next generation, decentralized, trusted replacement
> for the World Wide Web."
>
> And that creating DID:object was part of "a 4-year quest to create a
> platform to Tokenize Every Little Thing (ELT)".
>
> Wow..."replacement for the World Wide Web".
>
> Michael, perhaps I'm misunderstanding something, but how can you describe
> this as a 'decentralized' system, if Microsoft tools are required to run
> it?
>
> Isn't it just as fair to say that you're appropriating the word "object"
> and ensuring that only people who pay Microsoft can use it as a DID Method?
>
> "Object" was such a nice word, too. When you first announced it, I was
> hopeful about being able to use "did:object"; because it does seem the most
> appropriate word for publishing all kinds of "digital objects". (Good catch
> there!)
>
> But alas, now I can't. Unless I go along with 'One ring to rule them
> all...and in the darkness bind them' (Tolkien).
>
> I'm not an expert in this, but I'm going to suggest that the next version
> of the DID Method Registry should disallow this use of "object" because
> it's centralized, that is, controlled by one corporation who can require
> payment or set other rules to develop with it.
>
> Then, maybe someone else can make another DID:object, one without a
> 'pay-to-play' component, register it, and the two DID:objects can then
> compete in the real (digital) world.
>
> Oh what fun. [sarcasm alert]
>
>
>
> Steven Rowat
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Michael Herman
>
> Founder
>
> Trusted Digital Web
>
>
>
> Get Outlook for Android <https://aka.ms/AAb9ysg>
> ------------------------------
>
> *From:* Michael Herman (Trusted Digital Web) <mwherman@parallelspace.net>
> <mwherman@parallelspace.net>
> *Sent:* Tuesday, December 14, 2021 11:43:49 AM
> *To:* Brian Richter <brian@aviary.tech> <brian@aviary.tech>
> *Cc:* W3C Credentials CG (Public List) <public-credentials@w3.org>
> <public-credentials@w3.org>
> *Subject:* Re: Announcement: New DID Method Specification: did:object
>
>
>
> The Trusted Digital Web platform is capable of supporting and processing
> any class of Fully Decentralized Object from identity through to any type
> of business document or personal credential through to any type of NFT
> (e.g. photo, calf or kiss, etc.). If you're fairly technical, I recommend
> watching https <https://youtu.be/J6n9TvxA93I>://youtu.be/
> <https://youtu.be/J6n9TvxA93I>J6n9TvxA93I <https://youtu.be/J6n9TvxA93I>
> <https://youtu.be/J6n9TvxA93I>. If you're less technical, watch https
> <https://youtu.be/IuEew7rH5gw>://youtu.be/ <https://youtu.be/IuEew7rH5gw>
> IuEew7rH5gw <https://youtu.be/IuEew7rH5gw>
>
>
>
> The following 2 videos also provide a lot of insight into the use of VCs
> (aka the Structured Credential model) on the Trusted Digital Web:
>
> - https <https://youtu.be/9RLYS7Xvabc>://youtu.be/9RLYS7Xvabc
> <https://youtu.be/9RLYS7Xvabc>
>
> - https <https://youtu.be/kM30pd3w8qE>://youtu.be/
> <https://youtu.be/kM30pd3w8qE>kM30pd3w8qE <https://youtu.be/kM30pd3w8qE>
>
> did:object is, in fact, the ideal method namespace for the Fully
> Decentralized Object model as realized by the Trusted Digital Web.
>
> Thank you for the question Brian.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Michael Herman
>
> Founder
>
> Trusted Digital Web
>
> p.s. Here is a copy of the TDW ARM that illustrates the various VDRs
> supported by the Stratis Platform blockchain ...to answer your question
> more directly Brian.
>
> Reference:
>
>
> https://hyperonomy.com/2021/06/28/trusted-digital-web-8-layer-architecture-reference-model-tdw-arm/
>
> [image: Image]
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Get Outlook for Android <https://aka.ms/AAb9ysg>
> ------------------------------
>
> *From:* Brian Richter <brian@aviary.tech> <brian@aviary.tech>
> *Sent:* Tuesday, December 14, 2021 10:54:13 AM
> *To:* Michael Herman (Trusted Digital Web) <mwherman@parallelspace.net>
> <mwherman@parallelspace.net>
> *Cc:* W3C Credentials CG (Public List) <public-credentials@w3.org>
> <public-credentials@w3.org>
> *Subject:* Re: Announcement: New DID Method Specification: did:object
>
>
>
> Hi Michael,
>
>
>
> Interesting work. Is there a reason you decided on the "object" method
> name? I don't see anything in here that makes this method any more "object"
> oriented than all other did methods as a did is essentially an object for
> all intents and purposes.
>
>
>
> The CRUD operations describe implementation details of how to interact
> with the method (I assume through a library you've also published) but it
> doesn't go into technical specifics that I could see.. I'm interested in
> knowing how the method works on a technical level. Is it as simple as these
> objects are written to the Stratis blockchain (which I have no experience
> with). Are the signatures handled by the blockchain?
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Brian
>
>
>
> On Tue, Dec 14, 2021 at 3:00 AM Michael Herman(TDW) <
> mwherman@parallelspace.net> wrote:
>
> Checkout
> https://github.com/mwherman2000/TrustedDigitalWeb/blob/master/specifications/did-methods/did-object.md
>
>
>
> The publication of this DID Method specification realizes, in large part,
> a 4-year quest (or should I say personal mission) to create a platform to
> Tokenize Every Little Thing (ELT).
>
>
>
> Best regard,
>
> Michael Herman
>
> Founder
>
> Trusted Digital Web
>
>

-- 
Heather Vescent <http://www.heathervescent.com/>
Co-Chair, Credentials Community Group @W3C
<https://www.w3.org/community/credentials/>
President, The Purple Tornado, Inc <https://thepurpletornado.com/>
Author, The Secret of Spies <https://amzn.to/2GfJpXH>
Author, The Cyber Attack Survival Manual
<https://www.amazon.com/Cyber-Attack-Survival-Manual-Apocalypse/dp/1681886545/>
Author, A Comprehensive Guide to Self Sovereign Identity
<https://ssiscoop.com/>

@heathervescent <https://twitter.com/heathervescent> | Film Futures
<https://vimeo.com/heathervescent> | Medium
<https://medium.com/@heathervescent/> | LinkedIn
<https://www.linkedin.com/in/heathervescent/> | Future of Security Updates
<https://app.convertkit.com/landing_pages/325779/>