w3c
Normatively reference Controller Document
There is now a Controller Document specification that is on the W3C Recommendation Track through the W3C Verifiable Credentials Working Group. It is, fundamentally, the DID Core specification but generalized to just the document (not resolution) and allows any URL. The DID Core specification might want to use that specification as the base specification (as it can be done in a way that won't change implementations).
It is not only the DID Core specification. The vocabulary document must be rewritten, too. Almost all the terms in that document should refer to the controller document as for their formal definitions.
(I actually wonder whether that document should not be fundamentally changed. At present, it is not an RDF Vocabulary document, it is an HTML version of the @context, in some sense. Something to be discussed...)
I have already been getting questions about the controller document and how it relates to a DID document, and I think the best approach will be to just reference controller documents from DID Core, instead of defining DID documents from scratch as it is now.
The issue was discussed in a meeting on 2024-08-14
- no resolutions were taken
View the transcript
2. DID WG and Controller Doc.
See github issue did-core#854.
Gabe Cohen: The DID WG was kicked off recently, many of you have attended, one of the things we've discussed is aligning w/ Controller Document.
… It seems like consensus is forming in DID Core to remove content from that document and point to Controller Document. Timeline seems fine for VCWG Controller Document and DID Core. Just calling that out, we'd like folks to participate if they want to.
While this is ready for PR, we shouldn't do the PR until the Controller Document is in Candidate Recommendation, which is expected in November 2024.
This was discussed during the did meeting on 2024-09-05: https://www.w3.org/2024/09/05-did-minutes.html#t04
This was discussed during the #did meeting on 19 December 2024.
View the transcript
w3c/did-core#854
manu: I will do this one, this is a lot of surgery for the document
PR #877 has been raised to address this issue. This issue will be closed once PR #877 has been merged.