Re: did:nostr v0.1.0 and BIP-340 Data Integrity

čt 2. 7. 2026 v 16:39 odesílatel Filip Kolarik <filip26@gmail.com> napsal:

> On Thu, Jul 2, 2026 at 3:08 PM Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> ....
>
>>
>> Thanks Manu. So, the thing is we needed a predicate for MultiKey and so
>> on, and that's not in did v1 but it is in cid. I think Multikey is going to
>> be in did v 1.1 but is not published yet.
>>
>> Is that correct?
>>
>
> Hi Melvin,
> Multikey has its own context: https://w3id.org/security/multikey/v1 along
> with the CID context; see here:
> https://www.w3.org/2025/credentials/vcdi/vocab/v2/vocabulary.html#Multikey
>
> Congratulations on this milestone!
>

Thanks Will, Manu, Filip. This was very useful.

Following up on the @context issue, we could fix this in v0.1.1 by
restoring the DID context as the first entry, while keeping the CID context
alongside it:

"@context": [
  "https://www.w3.org/ns/did/v1",
  "https://www.w3.org/ns/cid/v1",
  "https://w3id.org/nostr/context"
]

The rationale is that did/v1 first satisfies the DID Core 1.0 requirement,
while cid/v1 continues to provide Multikey / publicKeyMultibase. In our
local jsonld.js checks, this appears to preserve the current semantics.

One question for Manu / the DID WG: during the DID 1.0 to 1.1 transition,
is the recommended practice for DID methods to stay on did/v1 until the DID
1.1 context is final and dereferenceable, rather than targeting v1.1rc1
directly?

Will, yes, we would be glad to discuss did:nostr on a CCG call. Let us get
v0.1.1 fixed first, then we can coordinate a date.

Thanks,
Melvin


>
> Best regards
> Filip
> https://www.linkedin.com/in/filipkolarik/
>
>