[w3ctag/design-reviews] three.ws — browser-native 3D AI agents with on-chain identity (Issue #1226)

nirholas created an issue (w3ctag/design-reviews#1226)

こんにちは TAG-さん!

I'm requesting a TAG review of three.ws.

three.ws is an open-source platform that combines three architectural 
patterns the web does not currently have a coherent story for:

1. Embeddable 3D AI agents as a first-class web content type, delivered 
   via a single web component (`<agent-3d>`).
2. On-chain agent identity (Solana) that travels with the agent across 
   origins, with on-chain attestations, revocation, and a signed manifest 
   binding the agent to its controlling entity.
3. A per-agent Model Context Protocol (MCP) endpoint, plus an OAuth 2.1 
   server, for tool-use negotiation between agents and clients across 
   organizational boundaries.

Further details:

- Explainer: https://three.ws
- Reference implementation (Apache 2.0): https://github.com/nirholas/three.ws
- Web component package: https://www.npmjs.com/package/three.ws
- Live deployment: https://three.ws — register an agent, embed it anywhere

You should also know about...

- A new W3C Community Group, "Agent Identity Registry Protocol CG," has 
  been launched to specify a DID method, credential format, and trust 
  negotiation protocol for AI agents. three.ws is contributing as input 
  material.
- The OpenID Foundation AIIM working group and NIST's AI Agent Identity 
  initiative are addressing adjacent problems from the enterprise side.
- W3C WebXR, WebGPU, Verifiable Credentials WG, and the Web Components 
  specifications all touch this surface.

We'd prefer the TAG provide feedback as: **early review**

We'd prefer feedback via: **this issue**

Specific architectural questions:

**1. Embedded agent trust boundaries.** When `<agent-3d>` renders inside 
a third-party origin, the host page, the embedding context, and the 
agent's controlling entity form a three-party trust relationship that 
existing same-origin and CORS models do not cleanly express. What 
boundary primitives does the TAG see as appropriate?

**2. On-chain identifiers as web identity.** Using a public-key 
identifier resolved via a public ledger removes the registry 
intermediary but introduces new fingerprinting and linkability surfaces. 
How should the Privacy Principles apply to pseudonymous-but-public 
on-chain identifiers used for agent authentication?

**3. MCP as a web protocol.** MCP is becoming the de facto agent 
tool-use protocol but has no formal relationship to the web platform. 
Should agent credential presentation be specified at the MCP layer, 
the HTTP layer, or as a new web platform primitive?

**4. Sustainability.** The Ethical Web Principles call out 
environmental sustainability. We chose Solana specifically for low 
energy per transaction. We would welcome TAG input on how on-chain 
identity work should be evaluated against the sustainability principle.

**5. Web component as agent surface.** Is a custom element the right 
abstraction for an autonomous, network-connected, AI-driven entity 
embedded in third-party pages, or does this warrant a new platform 
primitive (e.g., something analogous to `<iframe>` with explicit 
agent semantics)?

https://three.ws

<!-- Content below this is maintained by @w3c-tag-bot -->
---

Track conversations at https://tag-github-bot.w3.org/gh/w3ctag/design-reviews/1226


-- 
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/1226
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.

Message ID: <w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/1226@github.com>