Add DID Resolution error conditions to vocabulary (Fixes #922)

[valerodev]

Add DID Resolution error conditions to vocabulary. Fixes #922

[iherman]

You were quicker than me by 15 minutes :-) I had a yml file on my machine...

1. My changes rely on the existence of an (internal) class:

  - id: ResolutionError
    label: DID Resolution error
    defined_by: https://www.w3.org/TR/did-resolution/#errors
    context: none

added to the class section in the yml file. (Alas!, github does not let me add this through the review process.) This addition gives a proper categorization to the terms in the vocabulary. (I follow the same structure that we did in the DI vocabulary.)

2. The defined_by fields have been all changed:

• The URL should go to the final publication (on /TR) and not to the editor's draft
• As far as I could see, each entry on the spec has its own ID (which is great) that defines the term; that is the URL that should be used, imho.

[valerodev]

@iherman Done. I'm new to this so thanks for the guidance.

[iherman]

@iherman Done. I'm new to this so thanks for the guidance.

Happy to help!

[iherman]

Actually... you may have missed a spot:-)

In the https://github.com/w3c/did-resolution/blob/main/index.html#L2259 section I see 9 error conditions, and this PR has only 7. It may well be that your list the latest agreement on the WG for the error conditions and the file on the repo is out of date, but I thought it is better to warn you...

[valerodev]

You're absolutely right. Done.

[w3cbot]

This was discussed during the #did meeting on 12 March 2026.

View the transcript

DID Path PR \[1\] (10 min)

<ottomorac> w3c/did#923

joe: was trying to think through this

otto: manu have you checked this out yet? looks approved already

manu: i haven't run the linter/checker but if that passes looks right semantically
… yeah looks good

---

[msporny]

Overall, LGTM.

I might adjust these URLs: https://www.w3.org/TR/did-resolution/#INVALID_DID_DOCUMENT to these ones: https://www.w3.org/TR/did-resolution#INVALID_DID_DOCUMENT

We need to make sure we're consistent so when errors are thrown, a string comparison works. I'll check with the group today to see what we want to do here and then merge afterwards. Thank you for adding all of these @valerodev -- super helpful!

[w3cbot]

pchampin marked as non substantive for IPR from ash-nazg.

[w3cbot]

This was discussed during the #did meeting on 19 March 2026.

View the transcript

w3c/did#923

<manu> modify from something like `https://www.w3.org/TR/did-resolution/#DEACTIVATED` to `https://www.w3.org/TR/did-resolution#DEACTIVATED`

manu: It was noted that you don't have categories for errors for DID Resolution. They were added, but a slight change is needed.
… Have to stay consistent with what we have done in the past with other specs. Please review -- ready to merge.

wip: Are you adding or removing the /.

manu: no trailing slash.

ivan: +1. Adminstrative -- don't know the person that did the PR? Seems to be an outsider -- all good but have to be careful on the handling of the IP for the PR. Need to declare that the PR is non-substantive, so extra step needed.

pachampin: Can you confirm it is non-substantive. Marked as non-substantive.

manu: There are some other issues that are questions and discussions and they have been responded to. An interesting one from Joe about query parameters. Will want to process these in a future call.

ivan: Back to the Errors PR. If DID moved to 1.1 do we have to worry about moving the vocab version?

manu: We can think about it and discuss at a future meeting.

manu: We don't want to version the URLs. The vocab we don't version, but we do lock it to a serialization of the vocab doc.

---

[valerodev]

Done! and yes I'm an outsider. I'm a first year student, got a certificate that used VC. Got curious about how it worked, looked at the repo and saw I could help with some issues. Happy to help!

[iherman]

Done! and yes I'm an outsider. I'm a first year student, got a certificate that used VC. Got curious about how it worked, looked at the repo and saw I could help with some issues. Happy to help!

Thanks @valerodev, we value such contributions a lot. And if this meant you learned something new, all the better, everybody wins!