Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Proposal to Limit DID Method Selection to One Each From These Categories: Ephemeral, Web, Fully Decentralized #25

Open
jrayback opened this issue Dec 19, 2024 · 3 comments

Comments

@jrayback
Copy link

This suggestion is mentioned in our charter and has been informally discussed since the formation of the group. Can we formally decide that the output of this working group will be the selection & standardization of exactly three DID Methods - one ephemeral, one web-based, and one that is fully decentralized?

@ottomorac
Copy link

Hello I beg to differ. I know of at least 3 great did methods that are decentralized and it would not be fair to limit participation to just one (did:cheqd, did:iden3, and did:ebsi). As mentioned in our call earlier this week is to create a more general ranking of did methods overall.

@EugeRe
Copy link

EugeRe commented Dec 20, 2024

Personally, I would disagree to restrict the to one the decentralised methods. It restricts ratio for companies to further innovate, also the methods proposed they address different capabilities that different methods express in different projects: public, private and in terms of function, minimal or selective disclosure.

@mwherman2000
Copy link

mwherman2000 commented Dec 20, 2024

Part of my proposal is to group related proposed DID Methods into clusters ...then pick a representative method from each cluster to work on first.

IMO this approach is more inclusive - i.e. not devisive (i.e. doesn't create "haves" and "have nots"). Every DID Method has a home (i.e. it's cluster) and one of the methods will become a guide/North Star for the other members of the cluster. Work on each cluster can proceed in parallel.

[I know with the group dynamics that I might be better off simply putting forward a specific list of clusters (and criteria) but I'm trying to build some consenus around the idea first ...i.e. move the boundaries of the Overton Window.]

RELATED ISSUES

Primary

Secondary
#3

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants