Grant us a little leeway: it all takes time. The DID PLC registry is a placeholder because what we actually want is akin to a ICAN-style governance over it. Wh

Grant us a little leeway: it all takes time. The DID PLC registry is a placeholder because what we actually want is akin to a ICAN-style governance over it. When we talk about a “permissioned consortium” we mean as opposed to a “permissionless blockchain.” It’s not that we haven’t solved the mechanics; it’s that the right solution is a people/org problem and not a computing problem. We include DID Web as an option in our system, which comes with its own tradeoffs but essentially falls back to DNS+HTTP as a replacement solution. We did that for a lot of reasons, but one in particular is understanding that we may indeed have gotten this technical decision wrong, and need to move away from PLC. I should note however that DNS is akin to what we’re aiming for with DID PLC — a global org operating the central registry. The most egregiously absent solution with PLC is economic: it costs money to host the DIDs, but we don’t want to pass that cost on to end users. We’re going to need to suss that out, but the answer might just need to be that server operators pay for their registrations. I can understand you preferring ActivityPub. We wanted to pursue a different design. If we’re wrong, and AP thrives, I’ll be happy enough. Also, I missed “cheekily” in the copy review and I’m taking that out.