The monetary case seems like the natural first step. The name service case seems more interesting. It isn’t a financial instrument, so it demonstrates DAP utility for non-financial application.
You referenced a few standards that the DAPs adhere to, which lines up with assumptions I’ve had about the data schema management. In a generalized sense, it seems that community members, or a governing body, will propose changes, and if the community accepts them, the changes will be implemented into the network.
It seems to me the name service case has parallels to identity management through protocols such as SAML and LDAP.
But I’m still trying to wrap my head around examples I’ve heard such as building DAP social media apps that allow users to move their data to another DAP social app. Thinking of the social media sites we have today, they all consider their profile structures and models proprietary, as market differentiators that set each one apart from their competitors, and make up the “secret sauce” that gives social value to their users.
How would a DAP be able to maintain similar differentiators? Or is the expectation that only certain things such as basic profile information be stored on the blockchain, able to move to other DAPs, while other proprietary functionality is managed elsewhere?