Search results

Should we specify that the <code>alsoKnownAs</code> MUST include prior values for the DID after a move?

Status: Open.

#262 In decentralized-identity/didwebvh;

· swcurran opened on Oct 16, 2025

Verify that the specification verifies that the <code>portable</code> flag be respected

Status: Open.

#261 In decentralized-identity/didwebvh;

· swcurran opened on Oct 16, 2025

Consider mentioning Oblivious HTTP in the guidance documents related to did:webvh to mitigate "Phone Home" data collection

Status: Open.

#260 In decentralized-identity/didwebvh;

· swcurran opened on Sep 29, 2025

Consider making the domain portion of a did:webvh DID optional

Next VersionIssues that should be considered in the context of the next version of the specification.Issues that should be considered in the context of the next version of the specification.

Status: Open.

#255 In decentralized-identity/didwebvh;

· swcurran opened on Sep 9, 2025

Consider adding resolution options that go beyond DID Resolution that make use of the did:webvh Verifiable History

Next VersionIssues that should be considered in the context of the next version of the specification.Issues that should be considered in the context of the next version of the specification.

Status: Open.

#254 In decentralized-identity/didwebvh;

· swcurran opened on Aug 29, 2025

Investigate NIST Approved Data Integrity Suites future versions of the specification

Next VersionIssues that should be considered in the context of the next version of the specification.Issues that should be considered in the context of the next version of the specification.

Status: Open.

#245 In decentralized-identity/didwebvh;

· swcurran opened on Aug 1, 2025

Index of Normative Statements

Status: Open.

#212 In decentralized-identity/didwebvh;

· bumblefudge opened on May 8, 2025

Using witnesses and protecting verifiers

Status: Open.

#170 In decentralized-identity/didwebvh;

· blelump opened on Jan 23, 2025