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

Manu Sporny <> Mon, 14 May 2018 15:33 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 853DE12D952 for <>; Mon, 14 May 2018 08:33:34 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.901
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 1mKY8_DskoEY for <>; Mon, 14 May 2018 08:33:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8B428126BF7 for <>; Mon, 14 May 2018 08:33:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [] by with esmtp (Exim 4.86) (envelope-from <>) id 1fIFTd-0004iu-Aj; Mon, 14 May 2018 11:33:29 -0400
To: Graham Klyne <>,
Cc: Graham Klyne <>
References: <> <> <>
From: Manu Sporny <>
X-Opacus-Archived: none
Message-ID: <>
Date: Mon, 14 May 2018 11:33:29 -0400
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.7.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Language: en-CA
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on; SAEximRunCond expanded to false
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [Uri-review] Fwd: Registration request: did URI scheme
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: Proposed URI Schemes <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 14 May 2018 15:33:34 -0000

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:

... 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

-- manu

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