Joel Thorstensson
Joel Thorstensson
Context: I built a library for halo chips over the holidays and turns out the Ceramic PKH integration is not so nice. https://github.com/oed/halo-chip#usage-with-ceramic
Why do we support AccountId in the first place and not DIDs? To me this seems a bit backwards. People are more likely to know what a DID is rather...
Ok, what do you suggest as a next step @zachferland ? I still think that DID makes more sense as an abstraction to expose to users than accountId which is...
@zachferland sounds good, will go with the `getAccountIdByDID` approach. Is there a common package I can put it in? Maybe just in `did-session`?
Thanks @zachferland !
I'm unable to reproduce the issue locally using the example in your post. However, it looks like your repo is on an old version of `key-did-resolver`: https://github.com/spknetwork/spk-graph-client/blob/main/package.json#L44
@vaultec81 I tried the example code snippet you provided in OP in a clean repo and it worked for me. So I suspect maybe you have multiple versions of some...
We have a few implementations which uses EIP2844: https://github.com/ceramicnetwork/js-ceramic (@ceramicnetwork/key-did-resolver, use together with did-resolver) https://github.com/ceramicnetwork/key-did-provider-ed25519 https://github.com/ceramicnetwork/key-did-provider-secp256k1
Just to clarify, the `key-did-provider-*` just do the user interaction parts. The key-did-resolver does DID -> DID Doc resolution. Currently it's using `base58` which the did-jwt library supports. Also these...
What's the advantages of using the full key?