Added the registration JSON file for "webplus" DID method.

[vdods]

Instructions for Pull Requests

Please read these instructions thoroughly in order to ensure that your pull request is processed in a timely manner. This document contains detailed instructions for registering a DID Method. If your pull request concerns some other change to the repository, you may delete all of the text in this text box and write up a more relevant description.

There is a DID Method Registration form below that MUST be included in a DID Method Registration Request. The form includes check boxes that you are expected to fill out when you submit your request.

Once you submit your request, your pull request will be reviewed by the registry editors. Changes regarding the required criteria may be requested. If there are no objections or changes requested, your DID method will be registered after a minimum of 7 days.

DID Method Registration Process

In order to register a new DID method, you must add a JSON file to the ./methods directory.

Here is an example registration entry:

{
  // These fields are required
  "name": "example",
  "status": "registered",
  "specification": "https://w3c-ccg.github.io/did-spec/",
  // These fields are optional
  "contactName": "W3C Credentials Community Group",
  "contactEmail": "",
  "contactWebsite": "",
  "verifiableDataRegistry": "DID Specification"
}

Your Pull Request will be automatically validated, please ensure that all of the automated tests pass (no errors reported) or your submission will not be reviewed. Common reasons for failed validation includes invalidly formatted JSON files and missing mandatory fields.

----- DID METHOD REGISTRATION FORM: DELETE EVERYTHING ABOVE THIS LINE ------

DID Method Registration

As a DID method registrant, I have ensured that my DID method registration complies with the following statements:

• The DID Method specification defines the DID Method Syntax.
• The DID Method specification defines the Create, Read, Update, and Deactivate DID Method Operations.
• The DID Method specification contains a Security Considerations section.
• The DID Method specification contains a Privacy Considerations section.
• The JSON file I am submitting has passed all automated validation tests below.
• The JSON file contains a contactEmail address [OPTIONAL].
• The JSON file contains a verifiableDataRegistry entry [OPTIONAL].

[gatemezing]

In the proposal, I am missing privacy and security sections as per the sectionhttps://w3c.github.io/did/#security-requirements and https://w3c.github.io/did/#privacy-requirements. Am I missing something from the document?

[vdods]

Hi @gatemezing -- it's here: https://ledgerdomain.github.io/did-webplus-spec/#security-considerations -- though perhaps it's confusing that it's in the appendix. I'll move it into a more central place, and post again here when updated. Thanks for bringing attention to that!

[vdods]

Ok, it's updated -- see https://ledgerdomain.github.io/did-webplus-spec/#security-and-privacy-considerations

[vdods]

I've resolved the affiliation check. Not sure how to kick off the automated check to update that.

[w3cbot]

vdods marked as non substantive for IPR from ash-nazg.

[vdods]

Hi there! Can I get a re-review on this? Thank you.

[msporny]

Meets minimum registration requirements.

[swcurran]

As @msporny notes, the registration requirements are met.

While not a concern with with the registration, I did note something I hadn't realized in my previous readings of did:webplus. The deliberate use of the "/" as part of the DID seems inconsistent with the DID Core spec. The examples in Section 4.2 are DID URLs vs. DIDs, as they seem to presented as. The DIDs stop at the first slash "/", so technically, the only two DIDs in the list are did:webplus:example.com and did:webplus:example.com:3000. In did:web and similar DID methods, the HTTP path within in the DID uses :s in the DID, and in the DID-to-HTTPS Transformation, the ":"-separated segments are an HTTP path, with the separator changed to an / during the read. My concern with the spec as stated is that I think it is eliminates the possibility that DID URLs (as defined by the DID Resolution spec) -- can be used with did:webplus. For example, I don't think the proposed <did>/whois mechanism cannot be used with did:webplus. Again -- not a question for the registration, and perhaps better put in as a question in the DID specification repo.

Not that the PR is out of date and needs to be updated before it can be merged.

[vdods]

Thanks for reviewing and merging!

You're right Stephen -- I hadn't noticed that '/' was not present in the DID syntax. I had read through the long conversations in the did:web Github repo regarding DID syntax for did:web and potential simplifications to deriving the DID document resolution URL, which included discussion around '/' vs ':' to denote path components in the method-specific identifier, and I suppose I incorrectly inferred from that that '/' was a valid character. I'll need to change the did:webplus spec to use colons instead of slashes.