Add dependency on CID spec. #877

msporny · 2025-01-03T21:37:41Z

This PR is an attempt to address issue #854 by normatively referencing the Controlled Identifiers specification.

WARNING: This is a BIG PR -- as was requested by the WG. Please keep discussions and change requests limited to editorial changes and suggestions and raise a separate issue, if needed, to track larger structural change requests.

Preview | Diff

TallTed

Small editorial tweaks

TallTed · 2025-01-06T00:02:34Z

index.html

+<a data-cite="INFRA#string">strings</a>, each of which conforms to the URL
+syntax which are compatible with Section <a href="#did-syntax"></a>.


I don't understand what the compatibility is, in order to rephrase to make the sentence say so. Is it each of the strings or the URL syntax that is compatible with Section <a href="#did-syntax">?

Suggested change

<a data-cite="INFRA#string">strings</a>, each of which conforms to the URL

syntax which are compatible with Section <a href="#did-syntax"></a>.

<a data-cite="INFRA#string">strings</a>, each of which conforms to the URL

syntax which are compatible with Section <a href="#did-syntax"></a>.

This still reads oddly to me. It makes me think, controller property conforms to the URL syntax. URLs are compatible with the DID syntax.

Whereas the spec says:

The controller property is OPTIONAL. If present, the value MUST be a string or a set of strings that conform to the rules in 3.1 DID Syntax.

So I would use language similar to the id field.

... "that conforms to rules defined in Section ."

TallTed · 2025-01-06T00:03:43Z

index.html

+<a data-cite="INFRA#string">strings</a>, each of which conforms to the URL
+syntax which are compatible with Section <a href="#did-syntax"></a>.


Again, I don't understand what the compatibility is, in order to rephrase to make the sentence say so. Is it each of the strings or the URL syntax that is compatible with Section <a href="#did-syntax">?

TallTed · 2025-01-06T00:13:13Z

index.html

-might take many parameters. An example of this is a set of five cryptographic
-keys from which any three are required to contribute to a cryptographic
-threshold signature.
+A <a>DID document</a> can express <a>verification methods</a>, as defined


Suggested change

A <a>DID document</a> can express <a>verification methods</a>, as defined

A <a>DID document</a> can express <a>verification methods</a>, as defined in

TallTed · 2025-01-06T00:13:44Z

index.html

-<a href="#data-model">data model</a>); see <a href="#did-controller"></a>.
+      <p>
+A <a>DID document</a> can express <a>verification relationships</a>, as defined
+<a data-cite="CID#verification-relationships">Section 2.3: Verification


Suggested change

<a data-cite="CID#verification-relationships">Section 2.3: Verification

in <a data-cite="CID#verification-relationships">Section 2.3: Verification

TallTed · 2025-01-06T00:15:17Z

index.html

-<code>publicKeyMultibase</code> at the same time is prohibited.
-        </p>
+      <p>
+A <a>DID document</a> can express <a>services</a>, as defined


Suggested change

A <a>DID document</a> can express <a>services</a>, as defined

A <a>DID document</a> can express <a>services</a>, as defined in

TallTed · 2025-01-06T00:31:22Z

index.html

+made; for example, it was anchored on a blockchain.
+        </li>
+        <li>
+For the resolved <a>DID document</a> metadata, the `updated` timestamp is


Suggested change

For the resolved <a>DID document</a> metadata, the `updated` timestamp is

In the resolved <a>DID document</a> metadata, the `updated` timestamp is

TallTed · 2025-01-06T00:38:40Z

index.html

+In systems that are willing to admit metadata other than those constituting
+cryptographic input, similar trust may be achieved -- but always on the
+same basis where a careful judgment is made about whether a
+<a>DID document</a>'s content at the moment of a signing event
+contained the expected content.


Suggested change

In systems that are willing to admit metadata other than those constituting

cryptographic input, similar trust may be achieved -- but always on the

same basis where a careful judgment is made about whether a

<a>DID document</a>'s content at the moment of a signing event

contained the expected content.

Similar trust may be achieved in systems that are willing to accept metadata

beyond that which constitutes cryptographic input -- but this always requires

a careful judgment about whether a <a>DID document</a>'s content included the

expected content at the moment of a signing event.

TallTed · 2025-01-06T00:42:21Z

index.html

+Performing recovery proactively on an infrequent but regular basis, can help to
+ensure that control has not been lost.


Suggested change

Performing recovery proactively on an infrequent but regular basis, can help to

ensure that control has not been lost.

Proactively performing recovery, on an infrequent but regular basis, can help to

prevent loss of control.

TallTed · 2025-01-06T00:45:09Z

index.html

+Recovery is advised when a <a>controller</a> or services trusted to act on their
+behalf no longer have the exclusive ability to perform DID operations as
+described in <a href="#method-operations"></a>.


Suggested change

Recovery is advised when a <a>controller</a> or services trusted to act on their

behalf no longer have the exclusive ability to perform DID operations as

described in <a href="#method-operations"></a>.

Recovery is advised when a <a>controller</a> or any service trusted to act on

their behalf no longer has the exclusive ability to perform DID operations as

described in <a href="#method-operations"></a>.

TallTed · 2025-01-06T00:58:46Z

index.html

+not remedial, and is an embedded default. Readers are urged to read the
+<a data-cite="?CID#privacy-considerations">Privacy Considerations</a> section
+in the [[[CID]]] specification before reading this section is it contains
+more general privacy considerations that also apply to <a>DIDs</a>. The rest
+of this section covers privacy considerations that are specific to
+<a>decentralized identifiers</a> beyond the guidance provided in the
+[[[CID]]] specification.


Suggested change

not remedial, and is an embedded default. Readers are urged to read the

<a data-cite="?CID#privacy-considerations">Privacy Considerations</a> section

in the [[[CID]]] specification before reading this section is it contains

more general privacy considerations that also apply to <a>DIDs</a>. The rest

of this section covers privacy considerations that are specific to

<a>decentralized identifiers</a> beyond the guidance provided in the

[[[CID]]] specification.

not remedial, and is an embedded default. Before reading this section, readers

are urged to read the

<a data-cite="?CID#privacy-considerations">Privacy Considerations</a> section

of the [[[CID]]] specification, as it contains

more general privacy considerations that also apply to <a>DIDs</a>. The rest

of this section covers privacy considerations that are specific to

<a>decentralized identifiers</a> and are in addition to the guidance provided

in the [[[CID]]] specification.

w3cbot · 2025-01-09T17:01:15Z

This was discussed during the #did meeting on 09 January 2025.

View the transcript

w3c/did-core#877

wip: Manu has done a lot of work to align this with other spec.

manu: The group requested that we do this as a PR. Normally I try to do this as an editorial change, but it's a massive change.
… What this is trying to do is that over the last year decisions have been made, and there's a subset of people that wanted to see a controlled identifier specification but use the web platform. That's the CID spec.
… That was basically a copy/paste of the DID spec, but with the DID stuff taken out.
… So we are removing duplication from the DID spec.
… It defers to the CID spec, saying that if you want to do things like "also known as", go to the CID spec, with the modulo that DIDs are allowed as well.
… and makes DID a requirement for the document ID.
… The only other issue I ran into is that since the CID spec is not published yet and is in TR space, a subset of the terminology is not yet published.
… That will hopefully be fixed in the next month, which should fix it. The PR is ready for review.
… It's a massive PR to layer the specs correctly.

ivan: The CID spec is not published in the TR space under that name. It was published under the name of Controller Document, just to be clear.
… Manu, last time you sent an email saying that there's a PR there but don't review it yet. Is it now ready for review?

manu: I removed the draft state and it is now ready for review.

markus_sabadello: Can you comment what this means for the abstract data model and consumption and production of entries that are set for update?

manu: I tried to make those changes in this PR and it became complicated. Some of the sections are still useful, but I'm going to try to do those in a separate PR.
… This PR does not attempt to remove the abstract data model. There is still some misalignment between the CID and DID specs, so I expect to make those changes later.

iherman

This is a PR for a FPWD draft version, so the result will still undergo a multitude of reviews and changes; I did not look at all the details (it is way too complex to review it that way. I have spotted, however, two major and a minor issue; I think the major issues should be taken care of before merging.

The PR still uses the "Controlled Identifiers Document" title for the CID specification, but the name has been changed (again) for "Controlled Identifier 1.0" by the VC WG. That should be used overall.
In §5.1.1 Did Subject the new text does not make it clear that, in a DID document, the value of id MUST be a DID. It sounds obvious, but the previous version makes a stronger statement.

It may be that this requirement is between the lines in other places of the document; I think re-enforcing here would still make sense

The same comment applies to the DID controller section.
Minor knit in §9 Privacy Consideration: "specification before reading this section is it contains more general privacy considerations" should say "specification before reading this section as it contains more general privacy considerations" ("is" -> "as")

TallTed · 2025-01-13T20:40:33Z

The PR still uses the "Controlled Identifiers Document" title for the CID specification, but the name has been changed (again) for "Controlled Identifier 1.0" by the VC WG. That should be used overall.

I think the new title is Controlled Identifiers 1.0 (with the pural), like Decentralized Identifiers, no?

msporny · 2025-01-13T22:20:45Z

I think the new title is Controlled Identifiers 1.0 (with the pural), like Decentralized Identifiers, no?

Yes, correct.

wip-abramson · 2025-01-17T14:46:29Z

index.html

@@ -58,7 +58,10 @@

    // extend the bibliography entries
    localBiblio: ccg.localBiblio,
-    xref: "web-platform",
+    xref: ["web-platform", "vc-data-integrity", "controller-document"],


Suggested change

xref: ["web-platform", "vc-data-integrity", "controller-document"],

xref: ["web-platform", "vc-data-integrity", "controlled-identifiers"],

Not sure exactly what xref is doing here, but perhaps this should be updated to the new name?

wip-abramson · 2025-01-17T14:59:06Z

index.html

+          <td>no</td>
+          <td>
+A <a data-cite="INFRA#ordered-set">set</a> of <a
+data-cite="INFRA#string">strings</a>, each of which conforms to


Again, aren't we constraining the values to conform to the DID URL syntax? Not just any URL

The value of the id property for a verification method MUST be a string that conforms to the rules in Section 3.2 DID URL Syntax.

This applies to all verificationRelationships below aswell

wip-abramson · 2025-01-17T15:05:13Z

index.html

-threshold signature.
+A <a>DID document</a> can express <a>verification methods</a>, as defined
+<a data-cite="CID#verification-methods">Section 2.2: Verification Methods</a> of
+[[[CID]]]. Identifiers used in <a>verification methods</a> can be expressed


Suggested change

[[[CID]]]. Identifiers used in <a>verification methods</a> can be expressed

[[[CID]]]. Identifiers used in <a>verification methods</a> MUST be expressed

Unless I am misunderstanding this alignment with the CID spec, I believe this is a normative requirement of the DID spec

wip-abramson · 2025-01-17T15:07:12Z

index.html

+<a data-cite="CID#verification-relationships">Section 2.3: Verification
+Relationships</a> of the [[[CID]]] specification. Identifiers used in
+<a>verification relationships</a>
+can be expressed according to <a href="#did-syntax"></a> and


Suggested change

can be expressed according to <a href="#did-syntax"></a> and

MUST be expressed according to <a href="#did-syntax"></a> and

msporny added 2 commits January 3, 2025 11:50

Fix various broken links in the spec.

3f22ae4

Update Core Properties section to depend on CIDs.

264492a

msporny added the class 3 Other changes that do not add new features label Jan 3, 2025

msporny requested review from ChristopherA, davidlehn, jandrieu, peacekeeper, iherman, dmitrizagidulin, TallTed, decentralgabe, KDean-Dolphin and brentzundel January 3, 2025 21:37

msporny mentioned this pull request Jan 4, 2025

Normatively reference Controller Document #854

Open

msporny added 4 commits January 4, 2025 10:27

Modernize examples in specification.

84b9e79

Remove duplicated Security Considerations from CID spec.

2321227

Remove duplicated Privacy Considerations from CID spec.

0a1df4b

Clean up internal references to point to CID specification.

664def6

msporny marked this pull request as ready for review January 4, 2025 17:57

msporny requested review from mccown and danpape as code owners January 4, 2025 17:57

TallTed suggested changes Jan 6, 2025

View reviewed changes

iherman mentioned this pull request Jan 13, 2025

CR Request for Controlled Identifiers 1.0 - cid-1.0 w3c/transitions#691

Open

iherman approved these changes Jan 13, 2025

View reviewed changes

wip-abramson reviewed Jan 17, 2025

View reviewed changes

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Add dependency on CID spec. #877

Add dependency on CID spec. #877

msporny commented Jan 3, 2025 •

edited by pr-preview bot

Loading

TallTed left a comment

TallTed Jan 6, 2025

wip-abramson Jan 17, 2025 •

edited

Loading

TallTed Jan 6, 2025

TallTed Jan 6, 2025

TallTed Jan 6, 2025

TallTed Jan 6, 2025

TallTed Jan 6, 2025

TallTed Jan 6, 2025

TallTed Jan 6, 2025

TallTed Jan 6, 2025

TallTed Jan 6, 2025

w3cbot commented Jan 9, 2025

w3c/did-core#877

iherman left a comment

TallTed commented Jan 13, 2025

msporny commented Jan 13, 2025

wip-abramson Jan 17, 2025

wip-abramson Jan 17, 2025

wip-abramson Jan 17, 2025

wip-abramson Jan 17, 2025

wip-abramson Jan 17, 2025

		<a data-cite="INFRA#string">strings</a>, each of which conforms to the URL
		syntax which are compatible with Section <a href="#did-syntax"></a>.

	A <a>DID document</a> can express <a>verification methods</a>, as defined
	A <a>DID document</a> can express <a>verification methods</a>, as defined in

	<a data-cite="CID#verification-relationships">Section 2.3: Verification
	in <a data-cite="CID#verification-relationships">Section 2.3: Verification

	A <a>DID document</a> can express <a>services</a>, as defined
	A <a>DID document</a> can express <a>services</a>, as defined in

	For the resolved <a>DID document</a> metadata, the `updated` timestamp is
	In the resolved <a>DID document</a> metadata, the `updated` timestamp is

		Performing recovery proactively on an infrequent but regular basis, can help to
		ensure that control has not been lost.

	xref: ["web-platform", "vc-data-integrity", "controller-document"],
	xref: ["web-platform", "vc-data-integrity", "controlled-identifiers"],

	[[[CID]]]. Identifiers used in <a>verification methods</a> can be expressed
	[[[CID]]]. Identifiers used in <a>verification methods</a> MUST be expressed

	can be expressed according to <a href="#did-syntax"></a> and
	MUST be expressed according to <a href="#did-syntax"></a> and

Add dependency on CID spec. #877

Are you sure you want to change the base?

Add dependency on CID spec. #877

Conversation

msporny commented Jan 3, 2025 • edited by pr-preview bot Loading

TallTed left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

wip-abramson Jan 17, 2025 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

w3cbot commented Jan 9, 2025

iherman left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

TallTed commented Jan 13, 2025

msporny commented Jan 13, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

msporny commented Jan 3, 2025 •

edited by pr-preview bot

Loading

wip-abramson Jan 17, 2025 •

edited

Loading