Re: DID Formal Objection Status Update (Dec 2021)

On Tue, 21 Dec 2021 at 17:13, Ted Thibodeau Jr <tthibodeau@openlinksw.com>
wrote:

>
> On Dec 21, 2021, at 03:45 AM, Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>
> Couple of issues with this
>
> 1. W3C is supposed to be vendor neutral, any endorsement (ie w3c stamp or
> branding) of proprietary protocols would represent a change, and perhaps
> require careful optics
>
>
> Nothing about DIDs includes "endorsement (ie w3c stamp or branding)",
> including the DID-related Registries.  Inclusion there only requires
> satisfaction of the listed requirements, which do not include "not
> being associated with any vendor".
>
> If you meant something else, maybe some more words would help.
>
>
> 2. Proprietary, for profit, protocols by their very nature are so, by
> being centralized, even when they have distributed databases.  That's will
> lead to misleading claims
>
>
> The rubric exists because users (at all levels, from individuals to
> small enterprise to large enterprise to government, etc.) have many
> different factors to consider, which sometimes may lead to valuing
> a particular feature provided by a "centralized" DID method which
> is not provided by more "decentralized" DID methods.  I put those
> two words in quotes because, again, they have different meanings
> to different users, hence the rubric for analysis and comparison
> along all the various axes.
>
>
> On top of that, there's massive regulatory overhang
>
>
> Uh, what?  Bare declarations like this are impossible to evaluate,
> nor discuss.  Again, therefore, more words, please.
>

Hi Ted, not sure this is the ideal thread to elaborate further

tl;dr the DID method registry is a controversial part of the spec.  It's
going to be a challenge to get to the bottom of why that is.


>
> Be seeing you,
>
> Ted
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> A: Yes.                          http://www.idallen.com/topposting.html
> | Q: Are you sure?
> | | A: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation.
> | | | Q: Why is top posting frowned upon?
>
> Ted Thibodeau, Jr.           //               voice +1-781-273-0900 x32
> Senior Support & Evangelism  //        mailto:tthibodeau@openlinksw.com
> <tthibodeau@openlinksw.com>
>                              //              http://twitter.com/TallTed
> OpenLink Software, Inc.      //              http://www.openlinksw.com/
>          20 Burlington Mall Road, Suite 322, Burlington MA 01803
>      Weblog    -- http://www.openlinksw.com/blogs/
>      Community -- https://community.openlinksw.com/
>      LinkedIn  -- http://www.linkedin.com/company/openlink-software/
>      Twitter   -- http://twitter.com/OpenLink
>      Facebook  -- http://www.facebook.com/OpenLinkSoftware
> Universal Data Access, Integration, and Management Technology Providers
>
>
>
>
>