- From: Markus Sabadello <markus@danubetech.com>
- Date: Sat, 19 Oct 2024 00:00:44 +0200
- To: public-did-wg@w3.org
DIDComm endpoints can be a bit complex, e.g.: https://identity.foundation/didcomm-messaging/spec/#service-endpoint The idea of having a DID (instead of HTTPS URL) as service endpoint has been proposed here: https://github.com/w3c/did-resolution/issues/7 The idea of having non-correlatable endpoints have been discussed here: https://github.com/w3c/did-resolution/issues/35 Hope this helps? Markus On 10/18/24 6:48 AM, Christopher Allen wrote: > I'm seeing an example of a real-world or proposed DID endpoint that is > either quite complex (lots of parameters), or has multiple values > (multiple endpoints), or is a non http endpoint, or risks unique > identity correlation. Ideally all of these! > > It doesn't have to be a current DID method, but it should be something > that I can reference. > > My goal is to show how to transform that example into a safe, > non-correlatable commitment for that endpoint. > > Any suggestions of an example? > > -- Christopher Allen
Received on Friday, 18 October 2024 22:00:52 UTC