W3C Bot

This was discussed during the [#did meeting on 11 November 2025](https://www.w3.org/2025/11/11-did-minutes.html#63d7). View the transcript w3c/did-resolution#238 Wip: number 238 - currently there is no clear way to handle did resolution in...

This was discussed during the [#did meeting on 11 November 2025](https://www.w3.org/2025/11/11-did-minutes.html#0881). View the transcript w3c/did-resolution#232 wip: can we avoid term difinition duplication across DID specs - we can just point...

This was discussed during the [#did meeting on 04 December 2025](https://www.w3.org/2025/12/04-did-minutes.html#dc55). View the transcript w3c/did-resolution#232 <ottomorac1> Can we avoid term definition duplication across DID specs? #232 ottomorac1: we have some guidance...

This was discussed during the [#did meeting on 06 November 2025](https://www.w3.org/2025/11/06-did-minutes.html#9752). View the transcript Review PR for #213: Make conformance statements concretely testable <ottomorac> w3c/did-resolution#243 <ottomorac> Will has proposed some...

[nt1m](https://github.com/nt1m) marked as non substantive for IPR from ash-nazg.

This was discussed during the [#json-ld meeting on 12 February 2025](https://www.w3.org/2025/02/12-json-ld-minutes.html#cc7b). View the transcript w3c/json-ld-api#627 <gb> Issue 627 Recommend a way for dependent specs to call into this one, that's...

This was discussed during the [#json-ld meeting on 26 February 2025](https://www.w3.org/2025/02/26-json-ld-minutes.html#30c3). View the transcript w3c/json-ld-api#627 <gb> Issue 627 Recommend a way for dependent specs to call into this one, that's...