Drummond Reed

> Seven issues explicitly mention herd privacy and in the most recent discussion, both on voice calls and on github @talltree has dismissed privacy concerns asserting that herd privacy doesn't...

@jandrieu Saying that "herd privacy does not apply to all DIDs"—which I am—and "dismissing privacy concerns" are two different things. But I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree...

Thank you @msporny for finally describing the issue in a way that I could understand what this discussion was all about. I don't believe we made an error, however. There...

@gribneau: > Would supporting the existing HTTPS URL use of path as an element in identifying a DID subject in did:web interfere with any of the other methods that do...

See also [the suggestion I just made](https://github.com/w3c/did-spec-registries/issues/265#issuecomment-918855926) in #265 .

@rxgrant and @jricher: at the end of the DID WG call last week, both of you had a specific suggestions for the values of the Status tag in the DID...

Per a request from @OR13 in PR #341, and in light of the feedback received in the formal objections to the DID 1.0 spec, for the third time I will...

> I'd be happy to implement this in the existing pull request. Any objections? @rxgrant Not from me! I suggest we see if there are any objections or modifications on...

@rxgrant We didn't get any objections in the DID WG meeting today, but we didn't get any strong reactions in general. So here's my proposal: if you're willing to update...

> with a bit of more specifics about the details in a follow up PR to flesh out the details of point 2a through 2c of this registry we can...