Re: Ideal set of features and DID Methods?

Thanks Manu,

Whilst we could get into this analogy even deeper by agreeing that all kinds of car models have the same interface.  Also different 18-wheelers (in Australia they tend to be 32-wheeler road trains) have much the same interface.  But it doesn’t follow that most people will comfortably jump from private car to 32-wheeler.

Nevertheless, I agree - it was not right of me to just pick a number like “3 is ok, 5 is too many” because that’s a decision for the market to make and real world use cases to reveal.  But I do agree with your analogy of the model-T where we force ourselves to create only a few methods so that we dont put complexity in the way of adoption, and then when everyone has a ford and understand the value, we can offer them farraris 

On a related note, it is evident to me that many of the did methods relate to a specific technical “ecosystem” (ethr, iota, nostr, btcr, etc).  These are genuine and often very large ecosystems.  BUT, so far as I can see, it is very rare that a business ecosystem like international trade, education, health, etc overlays with a technical ecosystem.  In fact I’ve yet to see one example.  This is a big barrier to adoption because if we have 5 different did methods that are similar functionally but relate to different technical ecosystems, then implementers in a non-overlapping business ecosystem still have to implement all 5 so that they can accomodate the different technical choices of the members of their business ecosystem.  This is a reason we will always steer clear of any did method that is “technical ecosystem” bound from an implementation recommendation perspective.  

Kind regards,

Steve Capell
UN/CEFACT Vice-Chair
steve.capell@gmail.com
+61 410437854



> On 23 Feb 2026, at 9:10 am, Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com> wrote:
> 
> On Fri, Feb 20, 2026 at 7:31 PM Steve Capell <steve.capell@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I’m not 100% sure about that analogy.  Yes there are lots of specialised vehicles but we don’t all have to learn to drive every type.
> 
> To torture this analogy a bit more (why not!?):
> 
> How you drive any particular vehicle is the interface, and that's
> effectively the DID Document standard -- effectively the steering
> wheel, brakes, accelerator pedal work more or less the same in many
> vehicles.
> 
> How it works under the hood (gas or electric?, anti-lock brakes?,
> power steering? front-wheel drive? rear-wheel drive?), well that's the
> inner workings, that's the DID Method.
> 
> I expect more differentiation in the future than 3 DID Methods,
> certainly more than five, and if I had to venture a guess probably not
> more than 20 at global scale... but you're right, Steve... we need a
> Model-T moment to win over the horse-and-buggy before we can start
> talking about Ford vs. Ferrari.
> 
> The thing I don't want folks to get too worked up over is saying
> things like: "3 is the right number and 5 is certain failure!" -- I
> think we could standardize 10 in the first round and it would be
> better than what we have now... and in the long-term, some of those
> would die out. There are plenty of dead global standards out there and
> life goes on...
> 
> ... and as you said, I expect the market will eventually sort it
> out... something will hit scale, or maybe none of it will, and the
> world will move on. I just don't want to see the community tear itself
> apart over the details (as we've seen happen multiple times now).
> 
> -- manu
> 
> -- 
> Manu Sporny - https://www.linkedin.com/in/manusporny/
> Founder/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc.
> https://www.digitalbazaar.com/
>