You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
did:pkh is for identifiers based on hashes of public keys. Existing use cases use blockchain account addresses (which are public key hashes) and the blockchainAccountId property as part of the verification relationship. Is there desire for use of did:pkh with public key hashes that do not fit into blockchainAccountId/CAIP-10? Currently did:pkh uses CAIP-10 for the whole namespace, except for some prefixes allowed for legacy reasons that predated settling on using CAIP-10 in the DID: https://github.com/w3c-ccg/did-pkh/blob/main/did-pkh-method-draft.md#appendix-legacy-support
did:pkh
is for identifiers based on hashes of public keys. Existing use cases use blockchain account addresses (which are public key hashes) and the blockchainAccountId property as part of the verification relationship. Is there desire for use ofdid:pkh
with public key hashes that do not fit intoblockchainAccountId
/CAIP-10? Currentlydid:pkh
uses CAIP-10 for the whole namespace, except for some prefixes allowed for legacy reasons that predated settling on using CAIP-10 in the DID: https://github.com/w3c-ccg/did-pkh/blob/main/did-pkh-method-draft.md#appendix-legacy-supportSome possible non-blockchain public key hashes
gpg
): Draft: Add GPG namespace ChainAgnostic/CAIPs#66~/.ssh/known_hosts
(confirming server identity)ssh-agent
SubjectPublicKeyInfo
Are there any others that might be relevant for
did:pkh
? How might they be expressed in verification material?The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: