Re: [PROPOSED WORK ITEM] CEL DID Method (did:cel)

Steven, Manu, Steve, and all,

Your response meant a lot—"A light went on in my head." That perception is
exactly why I frame Glogos as the "armored transport."

The letter (content), the wax seal (identity), and the armored carriage
(substrate) are independent by design. This separation is what builds
*Resilient
Digital Trust*—a trust that remains verifiable even when the carriers or
the infrastructure fail.

For me, the goal is the journey *from Truth to Coordination*.

Verification (Truth) is only the starting point; the real power lies in
what follows: global, automated coordination. When a consignment's history
travels as a self-contained cryptographic log—validating itself at every
hop—we solve the audit bottleneck at its source. This is how we achieve
automated verification at scale.

I've been stress-testing this transition across 22 scenarios:

   - *Peer Review
   <https://github.com/glogos-org/glogos/blob/main/examples/use-cases/peer-review.ts>:*
Protecting
   the 'Truth' of scientific provenance.
   - *Supply Chain
   <https://github.com/glogos-org/glogos/blob/main/examples/use-cases/supply-chain.ts>:*
Realizing
   offline resilience for global trade.
   - *Carbon Credit
   <https://github.com/glogos-org/glogos/blob/main/examples/use-cases/carbon-credit.ts>:*
Coordinating
   verifiable environmental claims.

The demos (full list here
<https://github.com/glogos-org/glogos/blob/main/examples/README.md>
<https://mail.google.com/>) are snapshots of how this armored substrate can
bridge our different architectural needs into a single, coordinated reality.

Kind regards,
Mạnh Thành Lê
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SHA-256("") — From nothing, truth emerges
<https://github.com/glogos-org/glogos/blob/main/shared/artifacts/genesis-artifact.json>
code · cel · cell · citizen · card · cluster · consortium · civilization ·
cosmos


On Thu, Jan 15, 2026 at 2:56 AM Steven Rowat <steven_rowat@sunshine.net>
wrote:

> On 2026-01-14 9:00 am, Manh Thanh Le wrote:
>
> Here is how we distinguish them:
> 1. The Content: The Letter (The Asset).
> 2. The Identity (did:cel): The Signature (Who sent it).
> 3. The Substrate (Glogos): The Armored Transport (The Logic Layer).
>
> Hi Manh,
>
> Excellent. A light went on in my head when I read this list.
>
> So the Glogos can still be seen as the Envelope, if the Signature
> ('Identity Credential') is viewed as attached to the Content in the same
> way as a traditional signature is given on a physical letter. And this
> seems like it might be a useful metaphor for the overall system.
>
> That is: in a traditional letter and signature, — whether from the
> government telling you to report for the draft, or your mother telling you
> that your father has died, or a publisher telling you that they've accepted
> your manuscript — it's essential that the signature be accurate and
> associated with that particular letter. Otherwise it's worse than useless,
> it's confounding or confusing or deceptive.
>
> So in your list, #1 and #2 do create a linked package. Essentially, the
> Letter doesn't exist unless it has its correct Signature. So the two
> together, #1+#2, can be seen as the 'completed document'. Which is exactly
> why traditional letters, even to this day, require signatures and initials
> to be placed on each physical page (in legal documents, say, which commonly
> must be initialed on each page).
>
> Whereas #3 is the postal truck, or armed carrier, or post office worker,
> etc. These are how the Letter+Signature (Content+Creator) is carried from
> place to place without damage or dilution or corruption.
>
> It's far outside my knowledge to comment on whether and how well each of
> #2 and #3 can carry out these tasks digitally. But I've spent my life
> creating and dealing with various forms of #1 (Content), and have watched
> the massive metamorphosis of how #2 and #3 are carried on, as the world
> transitioned from physical to digital content and distribution.
>
> Up until this point, the newer distribution forms have been problematic
> for the creators of #1. But at least today I'm hopeful that some
> improvement is possible. So thank you for that hope anyway. And if Glogos
> can do what you predict, I may end up thanking you for more than that. 🙂
>
> Steven Rowat
>