Verifiable Web Identifier (urn:vwi) scheme

[trbouma]

I put together some ideas for a possible proposal. In short, I see the opportunity to abstract the best of did:web methods an dns/dnssec into a generic unifying urn scheme denoted by vwi (verifiable web identifier)

Comments, reactions, welcome!

https://github.com/CIRALabs/high-assurance-dids-with-dns/blob/w3c_proof/sandbox/vwi-scheme.md

[darrellodonnell]

Is there value (now or later) in using a urn:vid for Verifiable Identifier?

[trbouma]

I see urn:vid as an even more general scheme for things that don't use the web at all (IoT devices). I am hoping that we can get ToIP to embrace the concept of a urn:vid while we work on the more specific scheme of urn:vwi

[trbouma]

Anyway, I've noted that many urn schemes are provisional (for decades) according to IANA. So I am not holding my breath to get any type of approval soon. I figure the proof will be in the pudding if the community likes it or not.

[trbouma]

I added a section on 'embracing what is already built' https://github.com/CIRALabs/high-assurance-dids-with-dns/blob/w3c_proof/sandbox/vwi-scheme.md

[darrellodonnell]

As I read through the documents I am finding urn:vid to be a big distraction. While I agree that the concept here may turn into something else (E.g. urn:vid or vid:web) for now anyone that is DID-savvy is going to have trouble grokking things.

[darrellodonnell]

and our audience is did:web savvy people. I recommend leaving the urn:vid idea as a small section and look at it in the future.

[trbouma]

@darrellodonnell comment noted. This is still early and still formalizing the concepts and ensuring their rigour.

As this evolves, it will likely become simpler and likely another piece will need to be written to communicate this to the did:web folks. But we are not there, yet.