Some links to other attempts at a similar guidance #1
Comments
|
Those are great resources. DIF creates some great documents. I plan to
study them each and am glad this might contribute in some way for anyone. I
primarily made it for myself so it's broad appeal may be limited.
I chose the MIT license so anyone could pretty much do anything they wanted
with the diagram in whole or part if it was of any value to them. If there
is a need for a different license to help it be in line with other
artifacts let me know.
…On Fri, Nov 20, 2020 at 8:26 AM By_caballero ***@***.***> wrote:
First off, let me just say-- this is amazing! I think this can be very
helpful for both educational/research purposes but also as a first step
towards "dependency management," which is a useful and novel contribution!
Second, let me link some prior attempts at the first of the two goals,
that were crowdsourced through the Decentralized Identity Foundation's
interoperability working group. Both are presented as PDFs which, when
downloaded or viewed in "raw" mode rather than blob mode, are hyperlinked
to the underlying specs:
This diagram
<https://github.com/decentralized-identity/interoperability/blob/master/assets/ssi-architectural-stack--and--community-efforts-overview.pdf>
is an attempt at showing "equivalences" for people doing research on how
the "Aries stack" and "LD/CCG" stack compare to the more JWT-centric stack
historically incubated in DIF. Over time, this "three competing stacks"
mental model has largely become obsolete, so it might be answer a question
no one cares about soon. Inshallah!
This diagram
<https://github.com/decentralized-identity/interoperability/blob/master/assets/interoperability-mapping-exercise-10-12-20.pdf>,
which I think Sn,órre already linked to, takes even further the question of
"how is everyone else doing X"? Obviously, no one's systems are so modular
that they can freely choose to support any subset of the option in each
"bucket" or category, and an approximate color-coding was used to
differentiate between very early specs/tools and production ones. But it is
a more recent attempt at modelling what everyone's choices are at every
"level" of the stack.
Another very useful piece of documentation is a org/topic list
<https://gist.github.com/creatornader/c8a20c534d3cf8f65a9b34ce2ad81725>
maintained by Mattr Global's Nader Helmy, which decodes many of the
acronyms bandied about on the CCG list and in the other documents listed
above :D
Does "MIT license" mean you're fine with the map being linked from the DIF
educational resources page?
—
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#1>, or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABHQOU6GZ62DBBIVZMLJQ5DSQZVB7ANCNFSM4T4Y3HGA>
.
|
|
@creatornador's matrix I ran across while I was create this diagram and actually used it to cross reference the work I did. I find it to be an exceptionally useful matrix and when I posted this diagram to w3c-ccg working group listserv I called out the @creatornador document. |
|
I addition I have a personal DIF membership agreement and feedback agreement fully executed so you should be clear on the DIF side as well if any of that were needed. |
|
I review both of the highlighted docs and they bring a warmth to my heart. Both excellent diagrams and much less daunting to review than my own. They will be go to docs for me. And it answered one of the questions I left in my document about the did-comm/did-resolution spec relationships between Aries RFCs and non-Aries related. I can think of them more as a V1 (Aries) and V.next. |
|
Hahaha eggs on my face for missing the reference to Nader's chart! I'll email you some ideas about v2 :D |
|
This issue has been migrated to the new project location as an issue. It's new home is: |
First off, let me just say-- this is amazing! I think this can be very helpful for both educational/research purposes but also as a first step towards "dependency management," which is a useful and novel contribution!
Second, let me link some prior attempts at the first of the two goals, that were crowdsourced through the Decentralized Identity Foundation's interoperability working group. Both are presented as PDFs which, when downloaded or viewed in "raw" mode rather than blob mode, are hyperlinked to the underlying specs:
This diagram is an attempt at showing "equivalences" for people doing research on how the "Aries stack" and "LD/CCG" stack compare to the more JWT-centric stack historically incubated in DIF. Over time, this "three competing stacks" mental model has largely become obsolete, so it might be answer a question no one cares about soon. Inshallah!
This diagram, which I think Sn,órre already linked to, takes even further the question of "how is everyone else doing X"? Obviously, no one's systems are so modular that they can freely choose to support any subset of the option in each "bucket" or category, and an approximate color-coding was used to differentiate between very early specs/tools and production ones. But it is a more recent attempt at modelling what everyone's choices are at every "level" of the stack.
Another very useful piece of documentation is a org/topic list maintained by Mattr Global's Nader Helmy, which decodes many of the acronyms bandied about on the CCG list and in the other documents listed above :D
Does "MIT license" mean you're fine with the map being linked from the DIF educational resources page?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: