Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[DID Operations] "all the operations required of a CKMS" are not specified on the body of this section #21

Closed
brentzundel opened this issue Sep 20, 2019 · 3 comments
Assignees
Labels
editorial Editors should update the spec then close pending close Issue will be closed shortly if no objections

Comments

@brentzundel
Copy link
Member

@mwherman2000 moved from CCG (w3c-ccg/did-spec#147)

@msporny msporny added the discuss Needs further discussion before a pull request can be created label Oct 1, 2019
@rhiaro rhiaro added editorial Editors should update the spec then close and removed discuss Needs further discussion before a pull request can be created labels Dec 4, 2019
@rhiaro rhiaro self-assigned this Dec 4, 2019
@rhiaro
Copy link
Member

rhiaro commented Jan 25, 2020

The text for which this issue was originally opened now reads:

These operations can effectively be used to perform all the operations required of a CKMS (cryptographic key management system). For example, key registration, key replacement, key rotation, key recovery, and key expiration.

I think this makes the CKMS operations in relation to DID operations sound less literal and more indicative; each CKMS operation is covered by one of the DID operations (ie. registration and recovery by Read, replacement and rotation by Update, expiration by Deactivate). If agreed, this issue can be closed with no further spec text changes.

@rhiaro rhiaro added the pending close Issue will be closed shortly if no objections label Feb 10, 2020
@msporny
Copy link
Member

msporny commented Feb 13, 2020

This issue will be closed soon unless there is an objection to the changes made to address the issue.

@msporny
Copy link
Member

msporny commented Feb 21, 2020

The document has been modified based on input from the issue commenter. No further changes have been requested. Closing.

@msporny msporny closed this as completed Feb 21, 2020
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
editorial Editors should update the spec then close pending close Issue will be closed shortly if no objections
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants