Pierre-Antoine Champin
Pierre-Antoine Champin
This was discussed during the [did meeting on 14 November 2024](https://www.w3.org/2024/11/14-did-minutes.html#a3b0). View the transcript w3c/did-extensions#586 manu: On Joe's point -- 593 was raised. Document still says "Official Registry" -- that...
This was discussed during the [did meeting on 14 November 2024](https://www.w3.org/2024/11/14-did-minutes.html#78c8). View the transcript w3c/did-resolution#17 markus_sabadello: How DID resolution relates to DID Core. … how a DID gets to the...
This was discussed during the [json-ld meeting on 13 November 2024](https://www.w3.org/2024/11/13-json-ld-minutes.html#bb35). View the transcript Issue Discussion bigbluehat: We're working through the project list. gkellogg: added issues that are class 1-3....
This was discussed during the [json-ld meeting on 13 November 2024](https://www.w3.org/2024/11/13-json-ld-minutes.html#4a38). View the transcript w3c/json-ld-syntax#443 bigbluehat: This dove-tails with the profile-parameter conversation for other communities … If a media type...
Dear @trwnh , as you can see above, the WG considers that this issue should be addressed in the Best Practices document, but does not call for a change in...
This was discussed during the [json-ld meeting on 07 May 2025](https://www.w3.org/2025/05/07-json-ld-minutes.html#1914). View the transcript w3c/json-ld-syntax#443 <gb> Issue 443 `@protected` creates unresolvable conflicts when conforming to multiple normative contexts (by trwnh)...
This was discussed during the [did meeting on 23 January 2025](https://www.w3.org/2025/01/23-did-minutes.html#25a2). View the transcript w3c/did-resolution#52 JoeAndrieu: Think it is out of scope. DIDDoc is about getting the canonical DIDDoc. Can...
This was discussed during the [did meeting on 24 October 2024](https://www.w3.org/2024/10/24-did-minutes.html#b77f). View the transcript w3c/did-extensions#565 <ChristopherA> I just added w3c/did-extensions#582 ChristopherA: in issue 565, there is some recent discussion about...
This was discussed during the [pmwg meeting on 13 February 2025](https://w3c.github.io/pm-wg/minutes/2025-02-13.html#4a34). View the transcript w3c/epub-specs#2649 (wasm) mgarrish: The question was do we allow webassembly? … it isn't explicitly referenced from...
This was discussed during the [did meeting on 08 November 2024](https://www.w3.org/2024/11/08-did-minutes.html#c039). View the transcript w3c/did-resolution#37 burn: that link will show issues in the proper order. … subtopics that reference issues...