Re: [Uri-review] Fwd: Registration request: did URI scheme

[Manu Sporny <[e-mail]>]

On 05/14/2018 11:05 AM, Graham Klyne wrote:
> I think the issue might be titled something like: "Allow DID 
> documents to be retrieved using any URI scheme".

Ok, I understand the point you're making now. I've created a new issue
to track this here:

https://github.com/w3c-ccg/did-spec/issues/84

... and will track the discussion there.

> Rather, a generally preferred approach is to dereference the URI and
>  examine the content-type of what is returned.

What happens if the protocol you're using to resolve the identifier
doesn't provide a content-type in return? We have a couple of DID
Resolvers that might never return content-types (Bitcoin and Ethereum
come to mind). I guess we could require that all Resolvers return
content-types... but given the absence of a content-type, the front part
of the URI "did" provides all the information you need to process the
document.

-- manu

-- 
Manu Sporny (skype: msporny, twitter: manusporny, G+: +Manu Sporny)
Founder/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc.
blog: Veres One Decentralized Identifier Blockchain Launches
https://tinyurl.com/veres-one-launches