Cowrie Research

daoip-6-primary-sources-2026-05-10

2 min read

DAOIP-6 primary sources — 2026-05-10

Classification takeaway

DAOIP-6 is best classified as a namespace-based publication and trust-ranking extension for the DAO metadata stack. Its real contribution is not a new metadata schema, but an explicit model for how indexers should weigh contract-native publication, ENS publication, and service-provider attestations when multiple daoURI sources exist.

Primary sources reviewed

  1. DAOIP-6 GitHub page — https://github.com/metagov/daostar/blob/main/DAOIPs/daoip-6.md

    • Used as the canonical public reference for title, framing, status, and authorship.

  2. Raw DAOIP-6 markdown — https://raw.githubusercontent.com/metagov/daostar/main/DAOIPs/daoip-6.md

    • Used to verify the exact ENS text-record format, DNS TXT record path, indexing-priority order, and rationale around trust assumptions.
    • This was the most important source because the ranking logic is the main reason the standard belongs in the active corpus.

  3. DAOstar docs homepage — https://docs.daostar.org/

    • Used to confirm DAOstar’s broader standards mission and its framing around common DAO interfaces and discoverability.
    • Helpful for placing DAOIP-6 as part of a larger legibility-and-interoperability program rather than as an isolated ENS trick.

  4. DAOstar repository README — https://raw.githubusercontent.com/metagov/daostar/main/README.md

    • Used for provenance and to confirm the repository is the broader home for schemas, reference implementations, and DAO Improvement Proposals.

  5. DAOIP-6 discussion thread — https://github.com/metagov/daostar/discussions/211

    • Used as supporting provenance that DAOIP-6 was proposed as a discrete standards-track addition inside DAOstar’s public process.

Why it stays in the active corpus

  • It adds a concrete trust-ranking layer to the governance-legibility cluster instead of only another schema field.
  • It sharpens the corpus’s picture of where DAO discoverability authority can sit: in registration contracts, governance contracts, ENS primary names, ENS managers and resolvers, or trusted service providers.
  • The durable insight is that metadata publication standards are not complete until they also specify how clients should rank conflicting publication paths.

Graph View