-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 218
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.
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
RFC 0020: DID Reference Changes #22
Comments
+1 this ABNF change has been merged into the DID spec here: w3c-ccg/did-spec#189 |
+1 to making the change |
I'd like us to make sure we follow semver conventions around versioning these message families, what would be the rational for bumping to 1.1 if the message type representation was also changing? |
Good point @tplooker; maybe that resets everything to 0.9 with new message family identifier until accepted by the Aries community, then to 1.0? |
Yes I would like to be sub 1.0 until the community agrees as that allows minor version bumps to be breaking changes and stops us from eating through major versions until the protocols are stable |
We can proposed the current indy origin message protocols as 0.1 or anything sub 1.0 and then iterate with new minor versions until we agree, then we can bump to 1.0 |
@tplooker FWIW the semver compliance goal you articulated is also formally written up here: https://github.com/hyperledger/aries-rfcs/blob/master/concepts/0003-protocols/semver.md. So we should be following what we already said. Thanks for holding us to it. :-) |
I assume this change will propagate to all message type definitions. |
what timing should we effect for this? Should we do a blanket update of RFCs with the minor update? Should we wait? |
I suggest that we update all of the version numbers asap, as one PR. |
Closing this in favor of switching Types away from DIDs |
The DID spec is evolving, and the DID deference example used in RFC 20 isn't going to be accurate. Current example:
did:sov:123456789abcdefghi1234;spec/exampleprotocol/1.0/exampletype
Likely new syntax:
did:sov:123456789abcdefghi1234;service=spec/exampleprotocol/1.0/exampletype
When should we make this change? What considerations are needed for the transition?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: