Proposal to Limit DID Method Selection to One Each From These Categories: Ephemeral, Web, Fully Decentralized

[jrayback]

This suggestion is mentioned in our charter and has been informally discussed since the formation of the group. Can we formally decide that the output of this working group will be the selection & standardization of exactly three DID Methods - one ephemeral, one web-based, and one that is fully decentralized?

[ottomorac]

Hello I beg to differ. I know of at least 3 great did methods that are decentralized and it would not be fair to limit participation to just one (did:cheqd, did:iden3, and did:ebsi). As mentioned in our call earlier this week is to create a more general ranking of did methods overall.

[EugeRe]

Personally, I would disagree to restrict the to one the decentralised methods. It restricts ratio for companies to further innovate, also the methods proposed they address different capabilities that different methods express in different projects: public, private and in terms of function, minimal or selective disclosure.

[mwherman2000]

Part of my proposal is to group related proposed DID Methods into clusters ...then pick a representative method from each cluster to work on first.

IMO this approach is more inclusive - i.e. not devisive (i.e. doesn't create "haves" and "have nots"). Every DID Method has a home (i.e. it's cluster) and one of the methods will become a guide/North Star for the other members of the cluster. Work on each cluster can proceed in parallel.

[I know with the group dynamics that I might be better off simply putting forward a specific list of clusters (and criteria) but I'm trying to build some consenus around the idea first ...i.e. move the boundaries of the Overton Window.]

RELATED ISSUES

Primary

• Requirements based on Subject Scopes/Subject Domains #14
• Let's refer to a DID Method category as a _cluster of DID Methods_ #5

Secondary
#3

• Toronto Songwriter / Performer Use Case: DID Method Candidates #22
• DID Methods that serve the needs of a particular company or government should be given _less priority_ that DID Methods that address a broad range of organizations... #17
• Which DID Methods are primarily funded by, will be controlled by, or primarily to the benefit of the US Government (US military complex, DHS, FBI, CIA, CBP, immigration, etc.)? #15
• DID method considerations for institutional use of biometrics and decentralization #12

[jrayback]

I support the suggestion that we endorse a peer DID method as well. I understand that stating these three categories doesn't limit us per se but I think that stating explicitly that we want a peer DID makes sure that we select one.

[peacekeeper]

I agree a "peer" category makes sense. Feel free to create a PR to add that to the list of selection criteria here: https://github.com/decentralized-identity/did-methods/tree/main/selection-criteria

[ottomorac]

As stated in the meeting on 15-Jan. A different approach might be to cap the number of did methods at 10 total. That type of suggestion also sounds reasonable to me. I agree with the principle that for this initial version of the spec we do not want a super long list of did methods that would slow us down as a working group.

[peacekeeper]

we do not want a super long list of did methods that would slow us down

Yes.. Let's see how many proposal we get, and how many contributors.

[msporny]

A different approach might be to cap the number of did methods at 10 total.

I'll note that trying to standardize 10 DID methods, of even 5 via a global standards setting organization (like the W3C or ISO) would be a really heavy lift... it would take years, even if we had the specs more or less complete by the time we started the global standardization work.

Generally speaking, if we have more than 3, we need a strategy to use multiple SDOs and multiple SDO teams to get the specs through the long processes. I'm not saying it can't be done... just noting how big of a task getting a global standard done properly is.