Markus Sabadello

Closing after today's DID WG meeting.

Regarding a), some other specifications in the past (before DIDs) did include this. For example, [Web Linking](https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-nottingham-http-link-header#header.link) and [XRD](https://docs.oasis-open.org/xri/xrd/v1.0/xrd-1.0.html#element.link) distinguished between link types (aka "rel") and media types (aka "type")....

Note that some suggested properties in this issue such as `accept`, `rfc`, `tlsPinning` could also be defined separately as [DID Document Property Extensions](https://www.w3.org/TR/did-extensions-properties/). Maybe also interesting is an existing ToIP...

My first reaction to this is the same as @kdenhartog 's.. Just use separate verification methods, and update the DID document frequently. Use a DID method that makes updates cheap...

> signed key lists located in one's Identity Hub Reminds me of a great discussion led by @csuwildcat at DIF ID WG a while ago: https://github.com/decentralized-identity/identifiers-discovery/blob/main/agenda.md#meeting---12-july-2021---1400-et-recording

I agree with @OR13 that you could encapsulate the "key downloading" step inside the DID method, that's also what I suggested in https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues/811#issuecomment-998315814. I also agree with @csuwildcat that verification...

> why did we define `publicKeyMultibase` and `publicKeyJwk` as the only properties to represent public keys The way I see it, just because we defined those in DID Core doesn't...

@swcurran Maybe we can discuss this during the next `did:tdw` [work item meeting](https://hackmd.io/k4cIK9vQSlaeg2pdHE51IQ). One question is how much of this should be in the W3C DID Resolution spec itself (which...

Merging after suggestions applied and multiple approvals.

I agree the w3id mapping should be updated.. And eventually I imagine we will probably have an "official" context URI such as `https://www.w3.org/ns/did-resolution/v1` or something like that.