Re: DID considerations

On Sat, 23 Oct 2021 at 01:59, Timothy Holborn <timothy.holborn@gmail.com>
wrote:

>
>
> On Sat, 23 Oct 2021 at 00:28, Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, 22 Oct 2021 at 06:30, Timothy Holborn <timothy.holborn@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Heya,
>>>
>>> Long time ago, work was being done mostly via RWW, that considered HTTPa
>>> & an array of other ecosystem considerations.
>>>
>>> Since then DID work has developed.
>>>
>>> There's an objection going on ATM.
>>>
>>
>> AFAIK, there's an objection from Mozilla / Tantek.  Then again Tantek
>> objected to Solid being part of the SWWG too.  I get the impression that he
>> really dislikes Linked Data, but I dont fully understand why
>>
>> See:
>>
>> https://www.evernym.com/blog/w3c-vision-of-decentralization/
>>
>> Not been following it closely, but I'm sure DID will get through the w3c
>> process.  Just politics at play
>>
>
> Per the lists: Formal objections raised by Apple & Google also.  (not sure
> about Tantek?)
>  https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-did-wg/
> apparently
> https://web.archive.org/web/*/https://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/ethical-web-principles/
> related issues were raised.  looks like that started to evolve around the
> time i mocked-up some of https://github.com/webcivics/ontologies whereby
> the delivery of
> https://github.com/WebCivics/ontologies/blob/master/humanrights.owl into
> production should probably live (imo) on DID:UN or similar. (sadly no one
> appears to have advanced these works, if i am mistaken - please let me know
> the link to the ontology online)
>
> Vaccine Passports seemingly started in California
>
> https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billCompareClient.xhtml?bill_id=201920200AB2004&showamends=false
>
> and many are now built using this technology
>
> https://www.ibm.com/watson/health/resources/digital-health-pass-blockchain-explained/
>
>
>  https://www.iata.org/en/iata-repository/pressroom/presentations/travel-pass/
>
>
>
> https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/worlds-airports-and-leading-airlines-join-commontrust-network-and-begin-roll-out-of-commonpass-in-december-in-support-of-safer-border-reopening-301179752.html
>
> <https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/worlds-airports-and-leading-airlines-join-commontrust-network-and-begin-roll-out-of-commonpass-in-december-in-support-of-safer-border-reopening-301179752.html>
> https://trustoverip.org/get-involved/good-health-pass-implementation/
>
> Microsoft (which often provides infrastructure for governments) is also
> deploying a version of it; but afaik, its using JSON not JSON-LD.
>
> https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/active-directory/verifiable-credentials/decentralized-identifier-overview
>
>
> SO, there may be a future DID:MSFT Web, that isn't interoperable with the
> broader web.
>
> There's widespread reports (and 'common knowledge') of persons being
> excluded from society based upon the status of their 'vaccine passport'.
>
> So, ‘the web’ (‘internet’) has become a mandatorily required appendage for
> socio-economic participation as is now consequential to the global
> commercialisation of ‘vaccine passports’. Digital Identity infrastructure
> is now increasingly vital for any human being who seeks to have agency.
>
> There are different meanings different groups use when they speak about
> ‘identity’ or ‘digital identity’. Some definitions seem to mean
> 'property'.
>
> having been granted some assistance to get a better look into the
> situation (with thanks); my considerations are that there's an ethics /
> sustainability - impact on humanity problem (not new).
>
> W3C has traditionally not had scope like other groups, for example:
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IEEE_Society_on_Social_Implications_of_Technology
>
> DID Methods are presently 'platform' or 'platform company' centric.
> https://w3c.github.io/did-spec-registries/#did-methods
>
> This may result in different 'webs' forming where platform providers have
> a vested interest in making them not work with other online resources. A
> means to address that problem may be to change the URI DID Method Construct
> (and governance framework) to support societal groups.
>
> in effect -Change the DID methods to support the notations based on legal
> stewards of the methods (and underlying content on whatever DLT technology
> employed, including means to migrate to another).
>
> - DID:UN, DID:WHO, DID:EU, DID:NL, DID:UK, DID:ITU, DID:W3C
> etc.
>

Re: different "webs" that is already the case.  The idea of web
architecture is that all the URI schemes can interact with one another via
hyperlinks forming a multi protocol web

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_URI_schemes

Two of biggest are http: and file: so that's good if you want a network
effect, others are likely more niche

DID is just a set of schemes, and sub schemes with a common JSON format and
some agreed common structure, and set of functions

It would be interesting to see if that can lead to a standardized way to
write to the web, that is something more than HTTP POST, because that's
something of a black box

One reason is that, standardized ways to write to the web quickly become
Turing Complete and in turn can lead to an web operating system

In some sense, we're still a long way from standardizing that (a web OS).
In other ways, it's happening in lots of places simultaneously with
different groups

>
>
> If W3C is not the appropriate venue to address the social impacts (and
> indeed also the governance structures for a web, that may not require ICANN
> domains, etc.) then there is a mechanism to relicense:
> https://www.w3.org/2014/12/relicense.html
>
> Yet, if that were to occur, it should come with requirements and
> continuing support for the very important role of W3C.  Therein, part of
> the consideration is that this model would in-effect require the DID:METHOD
> platforms (regardless of underlying technology used) to use linked-data so
> that they're interoperable with other DID:METHODs (content sources) which
> would therefore require (amongst other things) a Mandate to use of Linked
> Data; semweb ecosystem components including updates to specs (W3C).
>
> Finally; my other suggestion is to Figure out what’s in DID: Network 0.
> There’s an opportunity to define sustainability related ontology that
> should be developed (i.e.: DID:UN, DID:ISO, etc.); yet, shouldn’t be ‘set
> aside’.
>
>
>>
>>>
>>> I working on a document that intends to be illustrative / positive, with
>>> a particular series of views expressed.  It's still draft, but here's the
>>> link [1].
>>>
>>> The suggestions I've been seeking to make as best as possible, in-turn
>>> seek to extend upon the underlying ecosystem works that once had RWW at the
>>> heart of it.
>>>
>>
>> This group is about reading and writing on the web.  Obviously writing
>> involves some sort of permissions, which leads to some sort of identity,
>> but the group itself is not about identity
>>
>
> DID Methods involve the use of Private Keys (or other AUTH instruments)
> that in-turn support read/write/append functions for decentralised
> web-resources / content.
>
>
>> At this point its quite nebulous, and unclear what your concrete /
>> specific goal is
>>
>> Do you actually have some concrete ideas about reading.  You mentioned an
>> RWW under apache.  That may be a good system, if you want to work on it
>>
>> I'd encourage you to narrow scope and be specific
>>
>
> My W3C work has been dedicated to supporting the growth of  patent-pool
> protected free, open & standards that are required to support freedom of
> thought, rule of law and other values of instrumental importance for
> humanity.
>
> For more information see:
> https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Patent-Policy-20040205/
>
> The only reason why that work needs to occur in W3C is as required to
> obtain patent-pool licensing for techniques used by humanity, as is
> required for inter-national world-order and peaceful development unto law.
> I have not been sponsored by a corporation nor have I retained a
> governmental job; as either circumstance would likely have had an impact on
> my ability to seek to foster future technology infrastructure needed for
> the betterment (support and protection) of persons, particularly with
> respect to vulnerable persons.
>
> I believe that the vast majority of requirements to achieve that goal, are
> near done; and the future growth is better able to be grown via traditional
> corporate environments with the infrastructure (support and protections)
> that provides.  As such, with this change of circumstance; my comments here
> are intended to provide support for the above noted goals.
> Therein & Nonetheless; i see potential for DID works to become
> instrumental for the future of a next generation 'web' (Web 3.0, etc.).
>
> So - FYI - there's my thoughts on how to make a solution that's not about
> DID:Google or DID:Apple (or DID:Akamai) whether it be from a wallet
> perspective, or the growth of tooling plumbed into app stores.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Timothy Holborn.
>
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Fwiw also: There's alot of conversation happening in the blue sky
>>> community[2] discord group (#Identity).
>>>
>>
>> I've spoken to some bluesky folks.  They are reviewing different systems
>> and doing a comparative analysis, before coming up with their own
>> recommendations.  Seems a sensible approach
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Once I finish drafting the doc, I'll publish it somewhere.
>>> Considerations are for the "betterment of Humanity", etc.
>>>
>>> Fwiw, the "Holborn crest" links to a place that's been around since
>>> londinium.
>>>
>>> I'm not going to be discriminating against unvaccinated persons; and I
>>> will continue to support works to improve support of rule of law.
>>>
>>> IMO; I'd the did ethical issues are sorted out, there's enormous
>>> potential for a next generation "web" (or internet?), But, imo, there's
>>> alot of work that still needs to be done.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>>
>>> Timothy Holborn.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> [1]
>>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1t8xkqlPew87xBzNn-Bj2lPHfGUHh4_VKbJE0YT976xQ/edit#
>>> [2] https://bluesky-community.net/
>>>
>>>
>>>