Re: Relationship between WebID and DID (documents)

Hi,

Let’s not forget that there are existing WebID implementations and I think
it should be one of the principles of this charter to make sure they stay
compliant. This can only be verified by way of a test suite.

Even small changes in the spec can break compatibility with existing
implementations, not to mention incorporating completely new things such as
DIDs.

Martynas

On Fri, 8 Dec 2023 at 22.02, Jacopo Scazzosi <jacopo@scazzosi.com> wrote:

> > DiD has nothing to do with neither Solid nor WebID. Mangling them will
> be a disaster, to put things mildly.
>
> Whereas I substantially agree with this statement, it’s worth noting that
> the DiD WG was started in 2019 and has already managed to publish the DiD
> spec as a W3C Recommendation through the Recommendation track. This
> recognition is much more visible than whatever controversy might or might
> not surround (or have surrounded) DiD. We are yet to demonstrate that we’re
> capable of getting to the same place, which reflects on the WebID spec
> itself. From this perspective, building on DiD is - on paper and leaving
> aside the respective pros and cons - a safer strategy than building on
> WebID.
>
> > only that I they should be explicitly stated in the WebID spec.
>
> This seems reasonable to me, given that there is functional overlap
> between the two. What is the argument against doing something that
> clarifies WebID’s place amongst other specs?
>
>
>
>
>