#1137: [wg/didmethods] DID Methods Working Group

Visit on Github.

Opened Aug 14, 2025

This issue was created because the 'horizontal review requested' label was added to § https://github.com/w3c/strategy/issues/492

This review is requested prior to the Advisory Committee Review.

Charter Review

The goal of such a group would be to standardize some of the popular DID methods registered at https://www.w3.org/TR/did-extensions-methods/ .

Charter

Expected end of charter refinement phase: early July

diff from charter template

What kind of charter is this? Check the relevant box / remove irrelevant branches.

  • New
  • New WG

Horizontal Reviews: apply the Github label "Horizontal review requested" to request reviews for accessibility (a11y), internationalization (i18n), privacy, security, and TAG. Also add a "card" for this issue to the Strategy Funnel.

Communities suggested for outreach

In the past month, some discussions have been going on between some participants of the DID Working Group, the Credentials Community Group, and the Decentralized Identity Foundation (DIF), about the creation of a W3C-DIF joint Working Group for the standardization of DID methods.

Known or potential areas of concern

As a reminder, the absence of standardized DID methods was a concern raised in the formal objections opposed to the publication of DID as a Recommendation. On the other hand, the DID Working Group insists that DID methods should not be standardized by the same group that defines the core of DIDs. This would, in the opinion of the group, give the wrong impression that some methods are better than others, which goes against the decentralized nature of DIDs.

Where would charter proponents like to see issues raised? (this strategy funnel issue, a different github repo, email, ...)

w3c/did-methods-wg-charter

Anything else we should think about as we review?

cc @peacekeeper @jrayback

Charter facilitator(s)

cc @pchampin

<!-- Content below this is maintained by @w3c-tag-bot -->

Track conversations at https://tag-github-bot.w3.org/gh/w3ctag/design-reviews/1137

Discussions

Log in to see TAG-private discussions.

Discussed Sep 1, 2025 (See Github)

Jeffrey: I reviewed the charter; it looks good except for two comments which I left in brainstorming. They use the word 'ephemoral' which means a lot but it's not well defined (we should ask them to). They also use the term 'decentralized' but this is not ncessesarily the case, e.g. in blockchain example, if a few actors control most of the network (which can happen) then you can change a document with their agreement.

Lola: You also asked if we should also ask them to co-ordinate with FedID and other identity groups. Do you think this has crossover?

Jeffrey: We have two different kinds of identity groups working in parallel, so we should suggest they start talking together. I think Sarven could help in drafting this.

Sarven: I saw this and self-assigned. The issue in w3c/strategy has been hanging for a while. Would you like me to review as well, in the next week? Maybe for tomorrow?

Jeffrey: it's only 3 weeks old that they asked for a review. Everyone else has given them feedback. Security asked them to do things. It would be good to get our review out. I think you have expertise here.

Sarven: Will review. Your review looks good.

Comment by @csarven Sep 10, 2025 (See Github)

We've replied in https://github.com/w3c/strategy/issues/492