Markus Sabadello

I propose that we add a subsection under "Security Considerations" to explain that this can problem can theoretically exist, depending on the nature of the DID method. And we can...

During discussion in today's DID WG meeting, there was consensus that while this is a legitimate concern, it feels mostly method-specific and should be covered in DID method specs, and/or...

I agree with @kdenhartog that even though this is method-specific, it could still be useful to include language in the DID Resolution spec itself. I like @ottomorac 's proposed language...

My preference: - 1..n contactName - 1 contactEmail - 0..1 contactWebsite

I agree with @jandrieu that signing is out of scope here. However the topics [Caching](https://w3c-ccg.github.io/did-resolution/#caching) and [Versioning](https://w3c-ccg.github.io/did-resolution/#versioning) are probably relevant, when it comes to the question of verifying a signature...

@TomCJones can you please join the [Credentials Community Group](https://www.w3.org/community/credentials/), otherwise we can't consider your contributions.

To summarize the discussion on this issue so far, how to verify signatures of VCs or other documents is out of scope here, but we could potentially add a few...

This has been addressed by https://github.com/w3c/did-resolution/pull/178, marking as pending-close.

Hmm sorry, I don't know.. Not sure if we have anyone else here who has tried this on Macbook..

Hello @Muthurajj , I'm sorry, but you are once again creating an issue that is very broad, not clear, and completely unrelated to this repository. When creating issues on Github,...