Add warning about self attested DID document metadata

[wip-abramson]

This addresses #163

---

Preview | Diff

[TallTed]

Editorial. Noun-verb agreement.

[w3cbot]

This was discussed during the #did meeting on 02 October 2025.

View the transcript

w3c/did-resolution#206

Wip: Yes so general call to the group we need to have at least 2 reviews...

<Wip> https://github.com/w3c/did-resolution/pull/206/files

Wip: This is simple PR just to address the issue.... any reactions?

Manu: This is RFC language, so need to clarify the SHOULD....

Manu: Perhaps just need to address the suggestion sentence, we need to be careful about how implementers would interpret, it might even be good for the "security considerations"

---

[w3cbot]

This was discussed during the #did meeting on 06 November 2025.

View the transcript

w3c/did-resolution#206

wip: Obviously, Markus isn't here, and he's technically the editor, but we've stagnated a little bit in the last month or so. It would be nice to have others get involved in the PRs and get them merged.
… PR 206 hasn't had any review, and it has just sat there, so if people could take a look at it we could get it in.

---

[w3cbot]

This was discussed during the #did meeting on 04 December 2025.

View the transcript

w3c/did-resolution#206

ottomorac: this one is about self-attested DID document metadata
… also approved by swcurran, some changes by manu
… it would be good to have Markus for this one

JoeAndrieu: some text close to the PR, but not changed by the PR, is incorrect
… I can raise this as an issue

swcurran: [proposes alternative text, that JoeAndrieu is happy about]

---

[wip-abramson]

Three approvals, this looks good to merge.

@peacekeeper / @msporny should I squash or rebase and merge