- From: Tom Jones <thomasclinganjones@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 2 Sep 2021 08:19:24 -0700
- To: Markus Sabadello <markus@danubetech.com>
- Cc: Credentials Community Group <public-credentials@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAK2Cwb4J2FCoaSz8UH=0ucA0xxFt6WFOcy9vn_z3B-e7ZKnj5Q@mail.gmail.com>
Flexibility on security is not a feature that I would brag about. ..tom On Thu, Sep 2, 2021 at 12:34 AM Markus Sabadello <markus@danubetech.com> wrote: > I sympathize with Mozilla's comments about centralized methods and > proof-of-work methods, and I believe these concerns could be addressed in > the DID Rubric and DID Implementation Guide documents, without necessarily > requiring changes to DID Core itself. > > Mozilla's other comment about lack of interoperability is however hard to > unterstand for me. > > The whole point of DID methods is to ENABLE interoperability between > heterogeneous identifier systems. > > Some use cases will only use a single DID method and not be interoperable > with others. > Some DID methods will become very popular and be widely interoperable > across many different systems. > Some DID methods may become standardized (e.g. did:key, did:web) and > therefore "effectively mandatory". > Some use cases will want to support as many DID methods as possible, even > less popular ones. > > This flexibility is a feature, not a bug. > > Markus > On 02.09.21 04:11, Orie Steele wrote: > > https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-new-work/2021Sep/0000.html > > The objection mentions comments from Google and Microsoft, but does not > link directly to them. > > Does anyone have a direct link to the comments from Google and Microsoft? > > OS > > -- > *ORIE STEELE* > Chief Technical Officer > www.transmute.industries > > <https://www.transmute.industries> > >
Received on Thursday, 2 September 2021 15:19:49 UTC