Re: Supply Chain Cryptographic Event Logs (was Re: [PROPOSED WORK ITEM] CEL DID Method (did:cel))

BOL is a contract for the physical shipment of goods. Trade in those goods (buying and selling) is a different set of documents (VCs).

I don't see verifiable histories playing into this at all. I think of verifiable histories as tracking changes to a DID Document...nothing to do with VCs ... separate animal species (they don't mate). Best not to conflate the two.


Get Outlook for Android<https://aka.ms/AAb9ysg>
________________________________
From: Steve Capell <steve.capell@gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2026 4:02:47 AM
To: Michael Herman (Trusted Digital Web) <mwherman@parallelspace.net>
Cc: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>; W3C Credentials CG <public-credentials@w3.org>
Subject: Re: Supply Chain Cryptographic Event Logs (was Re: [PROPOSED WORK ITEM] CEL DID Method (did:cel))

That’s describing how goods get from
A to B (one carrier contact of carriage or multiple carrier hops)

But, that’s orthogonal to the question of transfer of title during any of those individual hops (eg traders buying and selling the goods) - which is where the did:cel comes in

In today’s world, the title transfer is usually done by endorsing a paper original copy shipped around by courier

Steven Capell
UN/CEFACT Vice-Chair
Mob: +61 410 437854

On 20 Jan 2026, at 1:41 pm, Michael Herman (Trusted Digital Web) <mwherman@parallelspace.net> wrote:


It's not that complicated:
https://chatgpt.com/s/t_696eeb0e14e081919ad6acc3f035b5f7



Get Outlook for Android<https://aka.ms/AAb9ysg>
________________________________
From: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
Sent: Monday, January 19, 2026 11:42:47 PM
To: steve capell <steve.capell@gmail.com>
Cc: W3C Credentials CG <public-credentials@w3.org>
Subject: Supply Chain Cryptographic Event Logs (was Re: [PROPOSED WORK ITEM] CEL DID Method (did:cel))

On Sat, Jan 17, 2026 at 9:05 PM steve capell <steve.capell@gmail.com> wrote:
> Transferrable records.

I'm not sure the core of that flow is a did:cel or a did:webvh use
case -- it could be a VC use case where the bill of lading has a
controller that is set at every step of the journey by the previous
controller... where the changes to each re-issued VC are wrapped up in
a Cryptographic Event Log (CEL). So, you could punt the NFT and
blockchain network to the curb and just depend on raw/dumb
HTTPS-accessible storage to "hold" the latest version of the bill of
lading.

Don't get me wrong, you could model the ocean bill of lading as a DID
Document, where transfer of ownership is done via key rotation or
something like that. That's one of the benefits of Linked Data -- you
can embed graphs of information just about anywhere. That is also one
of the drawbacks -- you have many ways that information can be
modelled and we depend on a body like UN/CEFACT to tell us all how to
do it.

So, this could look something like:

1. Original bill of lading (BOL) is issued by the Shipper. BOL becomes
the first entry in cryptographic event log with Shipper as controller.
2. Shipper transfers cargo to Carrier. Shipper sets Carrier as
controller and digitally signs VC. Updated BOL becomes second entry in
cryptographic event log with Carrier as controller.
3. Shipper shares latest BOL in cryptographic event log with Bank,
bank releases payment to Shipper. Shipper sets Bank as controller and
digitally signs VC. Updated BOL becomes third entry in cryptographic
event log with Bank as controller.

I probably messed something up in the steps there (you are the expert
here, not I), but I hope you get the gist of how it might work with a
cryptographic event log. The DIDs would be the long-term identifiers
for the entities (Shipper, Carrier, Bank, etc.) -- those could be
did:web, did:webvh, did:cel, doesn't matter as long as they meet the
needs of the ecosystem. Digital signatures to "transfer ownership"
would be based on keys associated with each controller's DID.

> Long lived assets.

Yes, we are looking at CELs for this, and they'd mirror the sort of
thing going on with BOL above (except simpler -- usually just
buyer-seller transfers are recorded in the CEL over time).

> Authoritative issuers.

CELs may or may not play a role here -- you can combine DIDs with VCs
and CELs to get to multiple variations of what you're talking about
that work without the need for a blockchain (since you noted that
blockchain adoption is difficult in the supply chain space).

> Either way the market sees us as solving business problems through consensus rather than a bunch of techies arguing about who’s did method is better (no offence intended !).

Yes, agreed.

-- manu

--
Manu Sporny - https://www.linkedin.com/in/manusporny/

Founder/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc.
https://www.digitalbazaar.com/