Update relationship between DID spec and URI spec

[msporny]

@gklyne wrote:

(nit) You say "Conceptually, the relationship of this specification and a DID method specification is similar to the relationship of the IETF generic URI specification ([[RFC3986]]) and a specific URI scheme" - to me, it feels more like the relationship between the URN specification and a specific URN namespace ID.

[msporny]

Create a PR to update the spec language to make relationship between DID spec and URI spec more accurate.

[ppKrauss]

Hi @msporny, yes DID-spec resembles URN...

... perhaps the first step is to show "how to do this in the descentralized way": the new RFC 8141 was good, but not changed the central role of IANA in the control of urn-namespaces... Of course, with URN space registered, you can go ahead using concepts as resolution, a central mechanism for URNs, that can be descentralized.

URNs also offers a wide list of good use cases, to adapt here. The main use cases are pehaps the most complex ones, with hierarchical uniform names: as DNS, more centralization in the root-authorities. Document idenfiers, as DOI, ELI or URN LEX, all are conceptually URNs, all good use cases. The URN LEX shows the broader "path of decentralization".

[peacekeeper]

Fixed by #180. That PR added a NOTE which mentions both 1. the relationship between the "generic URI specification" and a "specific URI scheme", and 2. the relationship between the "generic URN specification" and a "specific URN namespace definition". Closing.