Re: Renaming the Verifiable Issuers/Verifiers spec

On Wed, Feb 25, 2026 at 10:46 AM Stephen Curran
<swcurran@cloudcompass.ca> wrote:
> +1 to Steve Capell's comment. I think that in addition (or where impractical, instead) of issuing a VC listing the registry entries, the registration authority should issue a VC to each registered entity that they could in turn publish. I think that should be within the scope of this effort.

Yes, agreed. I think that's already in scope and we cater to that use
case (but are not explicit about it in the spec). I have raised a
tracking issue to make sure we do what you said:

https://github.com/w3c-ccg/verifiable-issuers-verifiers/issues/50

> Taking that a step further (although outside of the scope of what I understand this specification covers) an entity with a DID could publish that credential they get from the registry authority in their <did>/whois Verifiable Presentation, for anyone to see. Given a DID, anyone can resolve "<did>/whois" to get verifiable data from "authorities" (whoever that might be) about that DID and the entity controlling it.  This is a link to the did:webvh spec where the <did>/whois concept is described -- https://identity.foundation/didwebvh/v1.0/#the-whois-use-case.

Yes, good point. I've raised another issue to track the discussion here:

https://github.com/w3c-ccg/verifiable-issuers-verifiers/issues/50

Thanks for the feedback, Stephen, much appreciated! :)

-- manu

-- 
Manu Sporny - https://www.linkedin.com/in/manusporny/
Founder/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc.
https://www.digitalbazaar.com/

Received on Wednesday, 25 February 2026 17:35:11 UTC