Drummond Reed

I like it too. And with that context, wouldn't just "Subject" work as the name? On Wed, Apr 3, 2019 at 7:17 AM Joe Andrieu wrote: > That's not bad,...

@SmithSamuelM I'm glad to see ACDC on the table here now for the VC 2.0 work. For WG members who may not familiar with Legal Entity Identifiers (LEIs) and GLEIF's...

So this might be a very naive question, but what's the relationship between this RFC and the discussions about group messaging going on in the DIF DIDComm Working Group? DIDComm...

This would have to be Troy or a member of his team. I’m cc’ing him on his new Gen email address. From: Stephen Curran ***@***.***> Date: Thursday, December 22, 2022...

@swcurran I like the idea of breaking out your JSON-based SCID format into a spec that any other spec could incorporate. I'm a huge proponent of SCIDs — so much...

100% agree. Also, the revised language should no longer refer to "Hyperledger Indy" as if that defined a specific credential format, right? If I understand correctly, Hyperledger Indy is evolving...

A first proposal (from @brentzundel): in the DID Spec Registries document, keep **one list** (the current list) of DID methods where the entire list is labelled as "Provisional". Then, based...

**Proposed requirements for a DID method to graduate from the "Provisional Registration" list to the "Formal Registration" li**st ([see previous proposal](https://github.com/w3c/did-spec-registries/issues/266#issuecomment-797104780)). _This is a strawman for getting ideas on the...

**Proposed status values for Formal Registrations of DID method specifications.** This is a strawman proposal for three progressive status values: 1. **Specification.** There is a published DID method specification at...

@kdenhartog I think that's a great idea. Here is an amended list of proposed statuses: 1. **Specification.** There is a published DID method specification at a reasonably stable URL that...