Re: New proposal for the DID WG charter

Hi Jeffrey,

I hear you repeating things that we've gone over many times.

In short, Ralph was wrong.

What's your response to the problem that picking winners and losers
directly diminishes the decentralization of the protocol?

As I wrote in DCD's formal objection:
  https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-new-work/2023Sep/0011.html

    [...]

    This widening the charter of the DID-WG will create an impossible
    situation for consensus, leaving members in opposition and further
    eroding good faith between working group members, as they would be
    pitted against each other in the process of picking winners and
    losers among the DID Methods, all while giving a false impression
    of consensus to outsiders, due to the reputation of the group's
    good consensus work to produce the DID-core 1.0 spec.

    Ralph Swick, for Tim Berners-Lee, erred in recommending this
    inherently centralizing path to DID-WG, rather than recommending
    that DID-WG explore the high road to consensus via solving DID
    Resolution in a way that **addressed the spirit** of the formal
    objections: that network interoperability must be demonstrated at
    some point.  This recommendation instead creates a totally
    unnecessary scarce resource: the order of standardizing, and it
    will be an unending fight.

Received on Wednesday, 1 November 2023 23:22:26 UTC