Join GitHub today
GitHub is home to over 40 million developers working together to host and review code, manage projects, and build software together.Sign up
I've been thinking about this for a while and I now have a slight preference, but I'd like to share some considerations first.
What is the DID subject in the case of an empty method-specific identifier? The answer that was given in the past was that the DID identifies the DID method or DID registry itself. But then, what does it mean...
I admit that some of the above sounds intriguing and could make sense. But on the other hand, an empty method-specific identifier feels a bit like a special case that is quite different from what DIDs have been designed for.
What I'd like to avoid is allowing this merely for being able to discover metadata about a DID resolver, or for some kind of general-purpose query mechanism to the DID registry. Those things should be handled differently, not by piggybacking on DID syntax and DID resolution. Instead, the question we need to answer here is "does it make sense for the DID registry to be considered a DID subject itself".