Restore contact names for did:erc725

[peacekeeper]

This method had 3 contact names, but only 1 was added in 6a3edac.

Maybe one thing that got lost in #353 and #357 is the ability to have separate contact emails for multiple contacts. That could be good :)

[msporny]

Maybe one thing that got lost in #353 and #357 is the ability to have separate contact emails for multiple contacts. That could be good :)

Yes, it got lost, however, I don't think we should have multiple contact names for a DID Method. If people want multiple people, do that behind a single email address. My reasoning is this: If there are multiple contacts, it's not clear who is going to take action when we need something done. In some cases, each of the contacts may think that the other person is on it/is going to respond. It's a failure mode we don't want, so let's make this easy on the Editors -- each DID Method registered has ONE contact email address.

[OR13]

@msporny I read your reply too late... this is why CI rules for PR approvals are better than trusting editors :)

[msporny]

I think the question here is "Who is ultimately responsible for the DID Method?" -- there should be ONE point of contact. The email could be "erc725@danubetech.com" (which will forward emails on to all of the contact names).

[peacekeeper]

I agree there should just be one point of contact.

[msporny]

@msporny I read your reply too late... this is why CI rules for PR approvals are better than trusting editors :)

I had a pending "Request changes" on this PR (which I can't submit now because it was merged) -- forgot to hit submit. Please undo. We need to discuss how we're handling this.

[OR13]

Reverting per the request, https://github.com/w3c/did-spec-registries/pull/371/files

[peacekeeper]

Why revert? The question of a single or multiple contacts should be discussed in a separate issue, if at all. It should not hold up this specific PR?