Rename Read to Resolve and clarify introduction

[wip-abramson]

This is an attempt to resolve #230 - or at least show one way that we might address #230.

Reviews and improvements welcome. Especially for the introduction.

---

Preview | Diff

[peacekeeper]

I have always found it useful to have two different terms for:

1. How a client invokes a resolver -> By calling the resolve() function using one of the available bindings (local, HTTPS, etc.)
2. How a resolver obtains a DID document -> By executing the Read operation as defined by the applicable DID method

So far, I thought 1. is "Resolve", and 2. is "Read". If we changes this, then what term do we use for 1. ? Maybe we don't actually need a term for that?

I feel a bit that this PR conflates two things that are not the same. With this PR, we are defining a "resolve()" algorithm in this specification, while also saying that each DID method must define how to "resolve" a DID. Isn't that a contradiction?

Maybe I'm overthinking this. If the WG feels that this change simplifies things, then I'm also okay with it...

[wip-abramson]

Thanks @peacekeeper, I understand where you are coming from. I put this together to show what the changes discussed in #230 would look like.

I agree there is a distinction between the 1) and 2) that you point out, but I do think that they are both aspects of resolve.

1. Is the standard way that you invoke a resolver.
2. Is the DID method specific way you execute a resolve operation.

I feel a bit that this PR conflates two things that are not the same. With this PR, we are defining a "resolve()" algorithm in this specification, while also saying that each DID method must define how to "resolve" a DID. Isn't that a contradiction?

DID methods must define how you resolve a DID makes more sense to me than: "DID methods must define how you read a DID."

The DID Resolution spec is defining a common interface to invoke a resolver independent of any DID methods specific resolve operation. It provides an interoperable mechanism to execute resolution requests for any DID. The DID resolution specification does not really define resolution, the "resolve()" algorithm is a thin wrapper that can be placed around any DID method specific resolution operation/algorithm.

[w3cbot]

This was discussed during the #did meeting on 15 January 2026.

View the transcript

w3c/did-resolution#271

Rename Read to Resolve and clarify introduction #271 by WillSome feedback has been provided by Markus.

wip: this is on issue 230.

<Wip> w3c/did-resolution#230

wip: I took a stab at fixing that.
… basically now I've renamed "read" to "resolve" throughout.
… And i added a section that clarifies the Resolution spec is defining an API on top of the resolution methods defined by the methods themselves
… Those two things.
… I was initially more in Marcus's camp: distinguishing between the call to the resolver and the process the method defines
… but now I think it's find to use the same term

<swcurran> +1 to the PR

<JoeAndrieu> +1 to me reviewing it

(it's probably good, but hard to scan while scribing)

manu: No objections to using resolution instead of read

<Wip> https://w3c.github.io/did/#method-operations

manu: are there any changes to DID core we need?

wip: we don't really define the names of the operations, so the text is probably fine. because we don't talk about "read" at all

manu: so DID core is good
… Maybe our registration process should change

wip: agreed. that says "read"
… I'm hearing no objections. If you can take a pass and review, that'd be appreciated.

---