Markus Sabadello
Markus Sabadello
The way I would put it is that the DID Resolution spec has a dependency on the main DID spec. I guess you could also call it a "layer on...
See my answer in the other issue https://github.com/w3c/did-resolution/issues/18#issuecomment-2332184349. I think we could indeed describe a bit better how DID Resolution related to DID Core and other specs.
> Does "Ready for PR" imply someone is to write something? What is the current status? Yes exactly, that's the intention of the "Ready for PR" label. Currently @mccown is...
I think this has been addressed by https://github.com/w3c/did-resolution/pull/151
My answer would be: 1. It's method-specific, some methods will support it, some won't. 2. Details of how to do it are out of scope for this spec, but we...
Coming back to this issue after a while, I still believe that specifying this feature is out-of-scope, but could be mentioned somewhere in a paragraph.
@mwherman2000 Up to you I think, since you opened this issue originally. I think it's clear that we won't define an algorithm or protocol or API for this in this...
Michael, if this issue is about making sure that Indy supports `did-url` syntax or DID Resolution correctly, then this really doesn't belong here. We hope that there will be many...
Michael, apologies.. First of all, I didn't know that you can't re-open the issue. I thought the original creator can do this, but now I learned that only people with...
I just re-opened the issue (like I said, I thought you'd be able to do that). I'm also sorry if there's any appearance of cliquish or insular behavior, this is...