W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-did-wg@w3.org > June 2021

Re: Current status of DID Core implementations (June 2021)

From: Markus Sabadello <markus@danubetech.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2021 09:29:38 +0200
To: public-did-wg@w3.org
Message-ID: <bdddba7c-5a3d-9b86-5bd8-8e54f7efaf55@danubetech.com>
I don't think it's true that we are lacking enough implementations for
"deactivated":

https://github.com/w3c/did-test-suite/blob/main/packages/did-core-test-server/suites/implementations/universal-resolver-did-btcr.json
https://github.com/w3c/did-test-suite/blob/main/packages/did-core-test-server/suites/implementations/resolver-did-ion.json
https://github.com/w3c/did-test-suite/blob/main/packages/did-core-test-server/suites/implementations/resolver-did-orb.json

Same for "nextUpdate" and "nextVersionId" I think.

Maybe the test suite isn't counting some implemented features correctly?

Markus

On 27.06.21 21:57, Manu Sporny wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Our latest implementation report for DID Core is available here:
>
> https://w3c.github.io/did-test-suite/#spec-statement-summary
>
> Here are the remaining items that the WG needs to discuss on the upcoming call:
>
> #1: Are the hl, relativeRef, and service implementations
>     independent enough?
>
> Our numbers are looking good. We now have two method implementations for hl,
> relativeRef, and service -- although, by the same implementer (Mattr). We'll
> have to debate if that counts or not on the upcoming WG call. If there are two
> independent implementers at Mattr that created their did:web and did:sov
> implementations, then it should count. If not, there may still be a good
> argument to count these as two independent METHOD implementations.
>
> #2: Are we letting the JSON serialization keep
>     unimplemented features?
>
> The JSON serialization continues to lack implementations for datetime, double,
> integer, and null. The WG has noted that they're going to keep those features
> in the spec anyway in order to support the entire JSON data model.
>
> #3: What are we going to do with deactivated, nextUpdate,
>     and nextVersionId?
>
> We are currently lacking implementation support for the following DID
> Resolution features:
>
> * deactivated
> * nextUpdate
> * nextVersionId
>
> DID URL Dereferencing now has two independent implementations for most of the
> features, but just barely.
>
> Those are the three remaining items to discuss wrt. implementations, AFAIK.
>
> -- manu
>
Received on Monday, 28 June 2021 07:29:54 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Monday, 28 June 2021 07:29:55 UTC