- From: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
- Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2022 09:58:31 -0500
- To: Steve Capell <steve.capell@gmail.com>
- Cc: Anders Rundgren <anders.rundgren.net@gmail.com>, Leonard Rosenthol <lrosenth@adobe.com>, Christopher Allen <ChristopherA@lifewithalacrity.com>, W3C Credentials Community Group <public-credentials@w3.org>
On Fri, Dec 16, 2022 at 3:56 AM Steve Capell <steve.capell@gmail.com> wrote: > I have to say that I find it a bit distracting and annoying that there is a discussion about how a recently released standard (VC & DID) is imperfect and should be fixed with a new standard FWIW, Steve, you're not the only one that finds the thread distracting, annoying, and dare I say, counter-productive. Informed debate is healthy... it's just that this particular debate doesn't seem well informed (as much as I have and always will respect Christopher's opinion/input) -- it comes across more as a "let's throw the baby out with the bathwater and start from scratch" than an attempt at a productive thread. I'm dreading having to go through each item in the "Facing Architectural Challenges in VC 2.0" point by point to demonstrate why some, but not all, of the points are a bit misguided. That's not to say there are some good points in there, but it's really frustrating to have solutions proposed that might address one concern, but fail to address the other concerns that VC 1.0, VC 1.1, and VC 2.0 (presumably) do. This is normal... "something better" will always be proposed... the question is, is it worth abandoning the work we've done over the past 8 years to go and chase the new bright and shiny? -- manu -- Manu Sporny - https://www.linkedin.com/in/manusporny/ Founder/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc. News: Digital Bazaar Announces New Case Studies (2021) https://www.digitalbazaar.com/
Received on Friday, 16 December 2022 14:59:20 UTC