Skip to content
This repository has been archived by the owner on Oct 29, 2019. It is now read-only.

Should DID syntax allow an empty "method-specific-id"? #198

Closed
peacekeeper opened this issue May 10, 2019 · 2 comments
Closed

Should DID syntax allow an empty "method-specific-id"? #198

peacekeeper opened this issue May 10, 2019 · 2 comments
Labels
ABNF discuss Wider discussion in an issue or meeting required before merging

Comments

@peacekeeper
Copy link
Member

There is an open question whether a DID without a method-specific-id should be allowed by the ABNF grammar. If yes, then should there be a trailing colon (e.g. did:example:) or not (e.g. did:example)?

This would make it possible to have a DID and DID Document for a DID method itself.

See #189 (comment) and #189 (review) and #187 (comment).
@peacekeeper peacekeeper mentioned this issue May 10, 2019
Merged
@peacekeeper peacekeeper mentioned this issue Aug 1, 2019
Closed
@rhiaro rhiaro added ABNF discuss Wider discussion in an issue or meeting required before merging labels Aug 16, 2019
@mwherman2000
Copy link

mwherman2000 commented Aug 19, 2019 •
edited
Loading

I'm glad the ABNF was left the way is: allowing for an empty method-specific-id ...to enable DID Data (metadata) to be returned about a DID Method (at the method level). For example...

image

@brentzundel brentzundel mentioned this issue Sep 23, 2019
Closed
@jandrieu
Copy link
Contributor

Closing because we've moved it to the DID WG did-spec repo.

Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
ABNF discuss Wider discussion in an issue or meeting required before merging
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
4 participants
@jandrieu @peacekeeper @rhiaro @mwherman2000