Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

What is the non empty value didResolutionMetadata when resolve is called #689

Closed
OR13 opened this issue Feb 20, 2021 · 6 comments
Closed

What is the non empty value didResolutionMetadata when resolve is called #689

OR13 opened this issue Feb 20, 2021 · 6 comments
Assignees
@peacekeeper
Labels
pending close Issue will be closed shortly if no objections pr exists There is an open PR to address this issue

Comments

@OR13
Copy link
Contributor

OR13 commented Feb 20, 2021

Screen Shot 2021-02-20 at 3 55 51 PM

This seems like a mistake... its not like you know the contentType of an Abstract Data Model did document....
@OR13
Copy link
Contributor Author

OR13 commented Feb 20, 2021

@peacekeeper @jricher @msporny

@msporny
Copy link
Member

msporny commented Feb 21, 2021

This seems like a mistake.

Nice catch, I agree; that's a bug. I believe this is a hold over from the original write up from @peacekeeper and @jricher -- defer to them to note what's going on in that text.

@peacekeeper
Copy link
Contributor

I agree this feels like a bug. Looks like this was introduced in 6cb86a38.

I suspect this was meant to say "... in the case of an error in the resolution process, this MUST NOT be empty."

(This would be parallel to the language about dereferencingMetadata in https://w3c.github.io/did-core/#did-url-dereferencing).

@jricher do you agree?

@peacekeeper peacekeeper mentioned this issue Feb 23, 2021
Merged
@peacekeeper peacekeeper added the pr exists There is an open PR to address this issue label Feb 23, 2021
@peacekeeper
Copy link
Contributor

I believe this has been fixed by #696 and can be closed. @OR13 do you agree?

@peacekeeper peacekeeper added the pending close Issue will be closed shortly if no objections label Feb 25, 2021
@msporny
Copy link
Member

msporny commented Mar 1, 2021

PR #696 has been merged, waiting on confirmation from @OR13 to close.

@OR13
Copy link
Contributor Author

OR13 commented Mar 1, 2021

yes, this can be closed.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees

@peacekeeper peacekeeper

Labels
pending close Issue will be closed shortly if no objections pr exists There is an open PR to address this issue
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
4 participants
@msporny @peacekeeper @OR13 @brentzundel