ceramicnetwork
Rewrite of 3ID
Naming question: Should we refer to it as 3ID or the 3 DID method?
- 3ID - easier to say and talk about
- 3 DID - more easy to understand since this is how you generally would refer to a DID method
Naming question: Should we refer to it as 3ID or the 3 DID method?
- 3ID - easier to say and talk about
- 3 DID - more easy to understand since this is how you generally would refer to a DID method
I do like 3 DID - it seems more technically accurate even though it is harder to say. 3ID seems more like a product name than a type of DID.
Does the "3" have mainly historical significance (presumably in relation to 3Box/Labs) or is there a deeper meaning behind it?
Does the "3" have mainly historical significance (presumably in relation to 3Box/Labs) or is there a deeper meaning behind it?
Yes, mainly historical significance. Also nice to show up on top here
how abt the "3id did". verbose but it saves the time to explain. So might be worth considering ser.
it took me a long time to understand did's are not intended as my digital id(entity). They are identifiers for my 'limbs' in the digital realm (accounts,actors,agents,intermediaries). imo 3ID sounds a lot like a (centralized) ID system.
@Joera given that any crypto keypair can be a did (using the did:key method) you can think of any keys you hold (in a wallet or even offline) as main or root identifiers. Other dids can then be created case-by-case and and granted revocable rights. 3ID DIDs can be one of those subsidiary DIDs (or "limbs" as you called them) that you can CRUD.
I'm not sure why 3ID's DID method sounds is centralized. Its certainly coupled to IPLD/IPFS, Ceramic and Ceramic's Tile Document. However it's hard hard to call it centralized when you can use their open source software today to spin up your own ceramic node(s), hosting your own 3ID DIDs (and other documents) without any centralized body stopping you.
Someone on core team can correct me but I think you're even free (in terms of rights) to make your own alternative ceramic network, anchoring to whatever blockchain you want. It wont interoperate but I believe it is doable.
hi deadly icon, yes, you're technically correct. devs with specific knowledge will recognize that. but what about the rest of the world? 3ID sounds like it is offering digital identity and digital identity will be associated with centralized systems, companies, governments that will approach identity from the wrong perspective, namely their own. dids can help us do things on the web, while keeping identity private. and by private I don't necessarily mean secret/hidden/anonymous . I mean something fluid, multifaceted that is our own. not something to be given/granted/appointed to us. stepping off my soapbox, my idea is that ID has become a word that is widely associated with a centralized approach to identity ( passport!) and that those associations are only confusing when we want to bring in people to do it differently.
@Joera I hear you but I think were more hung up on nomenclature than we are on the underlying concepts. My passport is not me just as my 3ID DID is not me. They're both identifying artifacts. We have many of those in the real world and we are going to have even more online. A did for every account you have is kind of the floor for how many DIDs were going to have to maintain and keep safe. Thankfully popular operating systems are building such stores. Apple and Microsoft are using Open ID Connect and FIDO. I presume we'll end up with a system where your OS stewards your massive collection of DIDs (keypairs) and sync's them across devices. Hardware keys that control all your susediary keys sounds like the security sweetspot. I doubt your average user is ever going to need to know what a DID is.
@deadlyicon , I guess I am a bit more lunarpunkish on the future use of ID (singular)
true, dids will be largely abstracted away in ux. so my "the rest of the world" matters a lot less. I guess the naming should fit for people in between super devs and regular users. people inquiring about decentralised technologies. people like me. I still think calling it what it is, will be best.
3ID seems like easier to refer to shorthand, and it is the W3C DID method name
After thinking more about how to approach 3ID and revocations I've realized that the revocation registry as defined in this CIP is relevant for all DIDs not just 3ID. I'm planning to rewrite this CIP to be focused on a pursely generative 3ID and create a separate CIP for the revocation registry.
Just made a big update to make 3ID purely generative. I'll create a follow up CIP for CapReg.