@Edent I'm not the author, you should raise those questions on the repo.If they have a mailing list I'd gladly post there, then. Making people sign up Yet Another Account for every single project is silly, people need to learn to use the correct tools for interaction.However, JSON-LD does have well defined schemas via Schema.orgPerhaps, but JSON does not have inherent support for schemas like XML does. Trying to do JSON with schemas is generally a terrible idea, as every protocol based on JSON eventually learns. If schema validation is not important, JSON would still be a poor choice as it seems that the intent is for users to write this by hand (no tooling seems to exist nor be planned), JSON is used for machines to generate, and machines to interpret (much like XML, for that matter).
This fetish for JSON seems very silly to me, as it has a lot of downsides which other formats don't need to re-invent the wheel for.I have a masters in computer science and still can't work PGP.Not sure if that's something to proudly state 😆
Regardless, I get that this particular idea ties it to domain name, but if we want to build a web of trust, it would make sense to learn from earlier models that are generally considered to have "failed", and figure out what we should be doing differently to give it a better chance of succession. I'm not suggesting we need cryptographic signing (though it wouldn't hurt, just upload a PGP signed message that we can verify with already existing web-of-trust infrastructure!), but to understand why the web of trust "didn't work" the previous time it was tried.