Summary of actions on a number of enhancements

[peacekeeper]

This issue summarizes actions to be taken on a number of proposed enhancement issues that can be supported via new DID resolution options or parameters:

Issue	Potential Parameter/Option name	Proposed Action
(7) Support DIDs as serviceEndpoint?	followServiceDid	Raise issue in did-extensions: w3c/did-extensions#620
(90) More advanced DID URL dereferencing for verificationMethods?	verificationRelationship	Create PR in did-resolution: #122
(85) Request service by type	serviceType	Create PR in did-resolution: #125
(46) Add support for JWKS	transformKeys	Close, since this extension already exists
(40) Expand relative URLs to absolute URLs in "id" fields	expandRelativeUrls	Create PR in did-resolution: #126
(39) Expand referenced keys to inline keys	expandReferencedVerificationMethods	Raise issue in did-extensions: w3c/did-extensions#621
(5) Discuss how to treat deactivated DIDs	returnDeactivatedDidDocument	Raise issue in did-extensions: w3c/did-extensions#622

Feel free to comment either here or in the issues about the specific enhancements.

[msporny]

+1 to the actions above.

[w3cbot]

This was discussed during the #did meeting on 07 February 2025.

[wip-abramson]

Thanks for putting this together @peacekeeper, the proposed actions look great.

The only issue I was unsure about was #40, I thought @msporny was advocating for it to be in the did resolution spec. But since @msporny has +1's to moving this to DID extensions then that clears things up for me.

[w3cbot]

This was discussed during the #did meeting on 13 February 2025.

View the transcript

w3c/did-resolution#121

markus_sabadello: This is a meta issue, summarize conclusions -- enhancements, links to seven other issues, for all of them, discussion around DID Resolution specification itself -- new parameters, resolution options, proposed enhancements, trying to summarize that here. That would take care of 7 open issues, specific enhancements, specific topics have to go somewhere, but an attempt to close discussion around some of these topics we've discussed in last

few meetings.

markus_sabadello: Please take a look, we can create PRs or move things to extensions.

Wip: I appreciate you putting this together, get issues closed; can we just close issue when all actions have been done?

<Wip> w3c/did-resolution#40

Wip: Manu, you said these actions are fine, my memory of issue 40 is that you thought that should go in resolution.

<ivan> +1 to joe!

manu: I'm non-blocking on that... I have a preference, but not blocking preference. Fine to do whatever the group wants.

JoeAndrieu: We need to be specific about DID Core vs. DID Resolution (we need to not use those interchangeably) -- we're talking about DID Resolution.

---

[peacekeeper]

I thought @msporny was advocating for it to be in the did resolution spec

I just updated the table to reflect this.

[peacekeeper]

Status update here is that the only enhancement that's still open is this:

Issue	Potential Parameter/Option name	Proposed Action
(90) More advanced DID URL dereferencing for verificationMethods?	verificationRelationship	Create PR in did-resolution: #122

After this PR #122 is merged, I think this issue here can also be closed.

[peacekeeper]

Marking as pending-close, since all proposed enhancements in the table have been addressed.