Issue#48 fix Capitalization fix for DID spec

[mskuybeda]

Fixed capitalization for DID parameter

[peacekeeper]

Thanks, this is a great start! Just a few comments: I think the title and headings should not be changed, i.e. remain in uppercase (or "Title Case" - apparently that's what it's called according to Wikipedia).

And could you also fix the remaining terms "Decentralized Identifier", "Decentralized Identifier Registry", and "Service Endpoint"?

[mskuybeda]

I can. Not really sure about these one:
<<And could you also fix the remaining terms "Decentralized Identifier", "Decentralized Identifier Registry", and "Service Endpoint"?>>

Do you want to make them lower case as well?

[peacekeeper]

Yes I think those should be lowercase as well, except in titles or headings. To be consistent with the DID Core spec..

[OR13]

@peacekeeper @dmitrizagidulin suggest closing stale PR with merge conflicts.

[TallTed]

@mskuybeda --

If you can resolve the merge conflicts, this will likely be merged to the main branch, and your contribution recorded and appreciated.

If you cannot resolve the merge conflicts, this will likely be closed without being merged, and your contribution lost to the sands of time.

[pchampin]

This was discussed during the WG meeting on 2024-08-22:
https://www.w3.org/2024/08/22-did-minutes.html#t11

[peacekeeper]

I propose to close this, since the capitalization has been fixed some time ago, e.g. in commits 73d2f61 and 0f9c23b, making this PR now obsolete.

[pchampin]

This was discussed during the #did meeting on 12 September 2024.

[mccown]

For readability, I prefer the title case. However, most of the standards seem to be lower case and it's better to be uniform.

[pchampin]

This was discussed during the #did meeting on 19 September 2024.

View the transcript

w3c/did-resolution#49 Issue#48 fix Capitalization fix for DID spec

<markus_sabadello> https://github.com/w3c/did-resolution/issues?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Aissue+label%3Apending-close

markus_sabadello: Closing the above issues after this call.

<markus_sabadello> w3c/did-resolution#29

markus_sabadello: A couple of other issues I would like to mark pending close
… issue 29 about the term DID resolver being defined correctly
… I think this is addressed in the spec

<manu> +1 to closing this one

<Wip> +1 to closing

<markus_sabadello> w3c/did-resolution#30

markus_sabadello: Also issue 30 that can be marked pending close. It is about dereferencing and whose responsibility it is
… The spec also addresses this

<manu> +1 to closing this one as well

markus_sabadello: I marked a couple of issues as good first issues. COntributions welcome.

#17 w3c/did-resolution#18

markus_sabadello: These issues are about the relationship between DID core and DID resolution
… It would be good to clarify this relationship in the spec with a couple of sentences

<manu> +1 to explaining relationships

---

[peacekeeper]

Closing, as discussed in today's DID WG meeting.