Resolve documents

[brianorwhatever]

We should add document resolution generally before attempting to resolve did witness logs in #29

[swcurran]

I think that resolving arbitrary, Controller added resources (e.g. AnonCreds objects, etc.) are different that the witness.json file, whose name and location are formally defined in the spec. The resources are for the most part defined outside the spec — in a document such as an “AnonCreds Method”. The witness.json file’s location and content are fully defined in the did:webvh spec.

That said, the did:webvh spec needs to define enough to enable defining a spec. like the “did:webvh AnonCreds Method. I think we have enough now with the “DID URL Handling” section, but we’ll see in doing the AnonCreds Method spec.

[brianorwhatever]

Ok, so what you're saying is we need to have a whitelist of documents from the spec? From a code perspective returning a did-witness.json, did.jsonl and for that matter did.json file run through relatively the same path. So in a server that is running didwebvh we want to only return documents as called out in the spec?

[brianorwhatever]

hmm to me it seems arbitrary files can be resolved as shown in https://identity.foundation/didwebvh/#did-url-path-resolution-service

[swcurran]

Yes — that’s the difference. Arbitrary files use the “implied” service (#files), but that service can be overridden in the DIDDoc and have a different value. The “allow list” of files (did.jsonl, did-witness.json, perhaps did.json — not sure about that one) — cannot be overridden and MUST be at the location defined in the spec.

Does that make sense?