Use publicKeyMultibase instead of publicKeyBase58 field in all examples

[Patrik-Stas]

Hi, I believe that some examples were by mistake using publicKeyBase58 rather than publicKeyMultibase - I've updated the examples. Let me know if I am missing something.

Cheers

---

Preview | Diff

[msporny]

The examples use Ed25519VerificationKey2018, which only supported publicKeyBase58. We do plan to update the examples to use more modern key formats such as Multikey, which does use publicKeyMultibase.

[msporny]

@Patrik-Stas could you please update the PR to use Multikey, you can find the format description here:

https://w3c.github.io/controller-document/#multikey

[decentralgabe]

Related to the context discussion on today's call. Suggestion is to pull in the new multikey context.

[w3cbot]

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

[iherman]

I trust the multibase values are correct...

[pchampin]

This was discussed during the WG meeting on 2024-08-22:
https://www.w3.org/2024/08/22-did-minutes.html#t06

[msporny]

Since we haven't heard back from the original author yet, I'll effect these changes on the core specification.

[pchampin]

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

View the transcript

w3c/did-core#852

manu: This one is waiting on merge conflict resolution
… We might have to do a more complete fix with this one. Or pull the PR in and make the fix later

decentralgabe: I noticed you tagged the author. If manu you can take it over that would be great

manu: Sure, I can take it over.

ivan: Why do you think it is aclass 2 change? I think it is a class 3
… using public key multibase effects implementations

manu: It effects the examples, this is non-normative

ivan: Okay, yep its a class 2

manu: There is a separate issue that discusses upgrading to publicKeyMultibase

https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues

---

[msporny]

This PR has been merged into PR #867. Closing.