Skip to content

Add section on Evaluating Competing Considerations. #799

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Merged
msporny merged 4 commits into from
Jul 7, 2024
Merged

Add section on Evaluating Competing Considerations. #799

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
4 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
3243006
Add section on resource usage trade-offs.
msporny Oct 4, 2021
0038960
Explicitly mark the trade-offs section as informative.
msporny Oct 4, 2021
253768c
Apply suggestions on competing considerations.
msporny Oct 5, 2021
e95f2b3
Fix wording in competing considerations section.
msporny Oct 6, 2021
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
18 changes: 18 additions & 0 deletions index.html
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -5026,6 +5026,24 @@ <h2>Level of Assurance</h2>
href="#privacy-considerations"></a> is applicable for such extensions.
</p>
</section>

<section class="informative">
<h2>Evaluating Competing Considerations</h2>

<p>
This specification does not require or suggest the use of any specific type of
<a>verifiable data registry</a>. Different use cases might result in different
requirements. Different requirements might suggest different considerations with different
trade-offs. For example, trade-offs between computation (energy usage), trust
(deference to authority), coordination (network bandwidth), or memory (physical
storage) might or might not be appropriate for any given use case. Other use cases
might not make the same trade-offs. Those that need to consider different criteria
Copy link
Member

@TallTed TallTed Oct 5, 2021

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
might not make the same trade-offs. Those that need to consider different criteria
might not make the same trade-offs. Those that need to consider different factors

Copy link
Member Author

@msporny msporny Oct 6, 2021 •
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Skipping this suggestion (applied all of your other suggestions) since the DID Rubric calls these things "criteria": https://www.w3.org/TR/did-rubric/#categories-of-criteria

Copy link
Member

@TallTed TallTed Oct 6, 2021

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'll live with it. Constructions like "those that need x should look at y which provides x" just make me itch. You can mark this as resolved if Github lets you. (It doesn't give me that option.)

for their use case are directed to the <a
href="https://www.w3.org/TR/did-rubric/">DID Method Rubric</a>, which provides
evaluation criteria to help decision makers determine whether or not a particular
<a>DID Method</a> is appropriate for their use cases.
</p>
</section>
</section>

<section class="informative">
Expand Down