Re: Bluesky spins out an entity for did:plc

I would argue we're better off clarifying the use case for non-webfinger
discovery and seeing if the work of giving AP implementers (at minimum) a
new endpoint to implement for a new DID method helps that use case along
and justifies the upgrade.

more generally tho, I like the idea! just learned long ago that did methods
are export formats for solutions to many (mostly implicit or underanalyzed)
usecases. prefer to have ground truth on which solutions justify an upgrade


------------------------------
Juan Caballero, PhD.
Freelance <https://www.caballerojuan.com> researcher, consultant, and free
thinker
Signal/whatsapp: +1 415-3101351
Berlin-based: +49 1573 5994525, CET/UTC+2
Native: English, Español; Functional: Deutsch, Français, Português

On Sat, Sep 20, 2025, 9:55 PM Sarven Capadisli <info@csarven.ca> wrote:

> On 2025-09-20 20:55, emelia wrote:
> > It's kinda like how people tried to cram absolutely everything into the
> > webid documents in solid.
>
> Kinda?
>
> Which people?
>
> Tried what?
>
> Absolutely everything refers to?
>
> As far as I know, there may be two relevant specifications to what you
> have in mind for your statement. If you had others in mind, please share:
>
> https://solidproject.org/TR/protocol
>
> https://solid.github.io/webid-profile/
>
> Can you point out where in those specs your claim is supported? Or are
> you referring to specific implementations or published documents?
>
> Are you bringing up some Solid/WebID history as if it proves your case,
> when the technologies and design choices differ? Because if so, that's
> perhaps kinda like a red herring?
>
> I'm not aware of Solid "people" trying to cram absolutely everything
> into a WebID document, but I'm all ears.
>
>  From experience, the vast majority of WebID documents use the WebID URI
> as the subject. Sure, there can be other statements where it's not (it
> is not forbidden), but pointing that out feels pedantic.
>
> Payloads and notifications in both Solid and ActivityPub often include
> auxiliary information in order to minimise network requests. Likewise,
> ActivityPub Activities frequently wrap the Object with considerable
> detail. Would you consider that to be "cramming everything" into the
> Activity? Or is it simply a design choice in linked data representation?
>
> "Linked data" people / connectionists do not see the world as binary.
> There is a spectrum of approaches to describing a resource, and in
> practice, that's just how the web tends to work.
>
> -Sarven
> https://csarven.ca/#i
>