Conversation
peacekeeper
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Added two small comments, but I'm fine with merging and improving later.
| </section> | ||
|
|
||
| <section> | ||
| <h3>Interoperability</h3> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Should this be called "Conformance" instead of "Interoperability"?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Maybe. Although then I think there should be more text in there. The question of interoperability is about constraint on what "conformance" means and I expect there should be more explaining the full scope of conformance if that's the section heading.
| <li> the specification contains sections describing security and privacy considerations.</li> | ||
| </ol> | ||
|
|
||
| <p>The working group's test suite will test all normative requirements for DIDs and DID Documents. Human evaluators will need to read DID Method specifications to evaluate conformance.</p> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Feels a bit strange to have text in the spec that talks about something the WG will do, no?
|
|
||
| <section> | ||
| <h3>Interoperability</h3> | ||
| <p>Interoperability of implementations for DIDs and DID Documents will be tested by evaluating an implementation's ability to create and parse DIDs and DID Documents that conform to the specification. Interoperability for DID methods will be determined by evaluating each DID method's specification to determine, at a minimum, </p> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The markup indents should be using 2 spaces per level. Also would be nice to wrap paragraphs at ~80 chars like the current format.
Co-Authored-By: David I. Lehn <dil@lehn.org>
msporny
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The spec shouldn't say what the WG will and won't do. Conformance statements that a human has to evaluate are typically not useful (not always, but most of the time).
Co-Authored-By: Dave Longley <dlongley@digitalbazaar.com>
per w3c-ccg/did-wg-charter#58
Preview | Diff