Markus Sabadello

I'm fine with the proposed change.

Regarding 9.4, I think there may be some theoretical situations where dereferencing is done by a client in an application-specific way. But I can't think of a practical example, so...

> > 1. I don't really like how this completely replaces the current "DID URL Dereferencing Algorithm" section. It would be better if this updates or extends the current section...

> My understanding is that a DID Path (even one produced by relativeRef) is expected to return the resource, not an array of URLs. > Given the service found, use...

> Is there something in the current DID Resolution spec that says that is supposed to be how it is happen? In this section: https://www.w3.org/TR/did-resolution/#dereferencing-algorithm-resource Step 9.1 says: > The...

@swcurran I'm not fundamentally opposed to this. As I said, several years ago I also used to think about the DID Path exactly like you do now. But the removal...

Just to note from yesterday's DID WG call, `did:example:123:/images/123.png` isn't a valid DID URL per https://www.w3.org/TR/did-1.1/#did-url-syntax: ``` did-url = did path-abempty [ "?" query ] [ "#" fragment ] ```...

I think the `DynamicDidUrlResolver` idea is basically the same as the "proxy" service type proposal that was first proposed [here](https://github.com/w3c-ccg/did-spec/issues/90#issuecomment-439936749) and then discussed [here](https://github.com/w3c/did-resolution/issues/35).

> `did:example:123/images/123.png` Currently, it's left to the DID method and/or the DID controller to define how to dereference such DID URLs with a path, and I don't think we should...

I agree this is a critical topic, that's why @dmitrizagidulin and I added a section called "DID Resolution Architectures" at the beginning of the DID Resolution spec: https://w3c-ccg.github.io/did-resolution/#architectures There's not...