Matt Stone: Light agenda today, IMS Badge Summit is tomorrow. ✪

Matt Stone: Any additions to Agenda? ✪

Kim (Hamilton) Duffy: Hi Kim Duffy from BlockCerts, we're building a Blockchain verification extension to Open Badges, that led me to Verifiable Claims. I've also been interested in other initiatives that this gorup is involved in, like Proof of Publication, identity profile model. I wanted to become a more active lurker. Hear about updates. ✪

Manu Sporny: Kim had some pretty interesting use cases that we've been discussing offline and maybe Kim and I can coordinate this week and get some clarity around the use case and put it forward to the group so we can have some discussion. The plan being introducing it to the group here, hash it out as a VC and then take it to the RWoT workshop in April and work on it F2F. Your thoughts, Kim? [scribe assist by Dave Longley] ✪

Kim (Hamilton) Duffy: That sounds great, didn't want to bring it up today, wanted a more fully formed proposal. ✪

Manu Sporny: No new insight from W3M, the chairs need to reach out and ask where we are no WG creation. We need to get some better status updates on where things are. If the chairs could reach out that would be good. [scribe assist by Dave Longley] ✪

Matt Stone: Playground is relatively new in the last week or two. ✪

Matt Stone: Any actions to take out of this ✪

Jonathan Holt: Sorry, checked it out, but didn't play in the sand yet. ✪

Manu Sporny: It's live but barely operational; we're going to add more examples over the next few weeks inclduing ones from different market verticals ✪

Manu Sporny: Have pulled in a intern to work on the playgound ✪

Manu Sporny: We can take Kims example; financial services, a loyalty card. we also have a developer helping us clean up the code -- it's their semester project ✪

Manu Sporny: Not much has happened since it went live, which is fine. It is barely operational :). It needs a lot of love. I think what we're going to try and do over the next couple of weeks is add more examples. Christopher Allen had a desire to start getting a collection of examples together in different market verticals. It's fairly easy to add those. That's why ... I think ... trying to get multiple things done at the same time, maybe we can take Kim's use [scribe assist by Dave Longley] ✪

Dave Longley: Case and boil it down into an example. Financial industry and loyalty card use cases we can put in there. We're going to be doing that. We've also pulled a dev in to clean up the spaghetti code. PRs are very welcome. Please don't hesitate to jump in and fix something that's wrong with it, a lot to be fixed. ✪

Manu Sporny: Need/plan to add more examples, have several ✪

Manu Sporny: Pull requests are desired; if you want to help please do ✪

Matthew Larson: I messed around with it a bit, can I put in my own RSA key and see it come out? ✪

Manu Sporny: Yes, that should work. ✪

Matt Stone: Any action items for the playground that we should track as actions? ✪

Manu Sporny: No but work will continue with our developers and other volunteers over the next few months ✪

Matt Stone: Next topic; old pull requests ✪

Matt Stone: There are some old requests sitting around; lets have a quick discussion about how to handle these ✪

Manu Sporny: https://github.com/opencreds/vc-data-model/pull/37 ✪

Manu Sporny: It should happen like this: we discuss it in the group; have a review, repeat as necessary until complete and after around 7 days the editors will merge it in. ✪

Manu Sporny: We should have at least 3 reviewers per PR tagged by the submitter ✪

Manu Sporny: 3 Reviewers without without objection = accepting and merging it. ✪

Dan Burnett: The chairs and editors can request review from others who might have opinions; otherwise what manu stated is the general rule ✪

Jonathan Holt: I like the buddy system by tagging me, I am a sucker for peer-pressure and feel that have to check that box off of my to-do list. ✪

Dan Burnett: Also, editors can always make minor changes like typos ✪

Dan Burnett: The main thing is that there are no objects and there's general agreement amoungst those who care... ✪

Joe Andrieu: Question : is there a lightweight way to +1 a pull request? i.e. I don't have anything much to say but I'm good with it. ✪

Manu Sporny: There's a thumbs-up, yes. ✪

Manu Sporny: https://github.com/opencreds/vc-data-model/pull/37 ✪

Manu Sporny: If you want to do that then put it on the very top comment ✪

Dan Burnett: You can also just comment "looks good to me" ✪

Dan Burnett: FYI LGTM is a popular acronym that means the same thing so feel free to use that too ✪

Manu Sporny: Awesome job on the PR, Joe Andrieu, that is a good example ✪

Matt Stone: We have a github tutorial that covers PRs; do we need to discuss it again? ✪

Dan Burnett: Its in the mailing list archives and if anyone wants to put it on the agenda please just ask ✪

Dan Burnett: There are a couple that were submitted but they're left hanging; who should take charge to get them resolved ✪

Manu Sporny: Dan, please assign a couple of reviewers -- some are missing reviewers ✪

Dan Burnett: I'll request reviewers unless it's just typos in which case I'll just go ahead and merge ✪

Manu Sporny: Added a few PRs today: https://github.com/opencreds/vc-data-model/pulls ✪

Manu Sporny: Just noting that there are a couple of other PRs there to address issues that JoeAndrieu inspired me to take on; a couple folks are tagged as reviewers but haven't said anything including amigus; please do ✪

Joe Andrieu: How do i see that I have been tagged? do i get an email? is there a way i can filter? ✪

Manu Sporny: I think you can filter by 'awaiting review from you' which is in the dropdown at the bottom. ✪

Joe Andrieu: When I was editing what became my PR -- is there a way to see the HTML rendered? ✪

Manu Sporny: No, not really unless you use the file:/// url -- it's non-obvious and not really built in ✪

Joe Andrieu: When you view it in preview you do see the HTML ✪

Manu Sporny: That's a result of how you are doing edits (using githubs online editor) whereas must of use download the repo ✪

Gregg Kellogg: Rawgit allows you to take any commit and display as formatted HTML. ✪

Jonathan Holt: Github Desktop is an option. Click on the desktop icon. ✪

Manu Sporny: Its all a lot easier if you download the repo, checkout, commit, ... which is in the tutorial; bottom line is that content is the most important ✪

Joe Andrieu: I'm glad it all worked out; next time I'll clone the repo ✪

Dan Burnett: Gkellogg, I have had mixed success with rawgit, but if you can post a quick way that you have found reliable that would be helpful ✪

Matt Stone: Closing topic PR; next topic is action item review ✪

Joe Andrieu: I don't know that we need to track the one on line two given that its getting covered in github issues ✪

Joe Andrieu: Was amigus going to get us templates for the privacy work; should i use those? ✪

Adam Migus: I have the NIST privacy risk templates. [scribe assist by Manu Sporny] ✪

Adam Migus: If you want to take a crack at using those, then I can send them to you. [scribe assist by Manu Sporny] ✪

Joe Kaplan: Yes, that'd be great. [scribe assist by Manu Sporny] ✪

Adam Migus: Ok, I'll send them to the list. [scribe assist by Manu Sporny] ✪

Manu Sporny: There is another action on line 4 which is privacy analysis of agropper's use-case; i think that's closed out because JoeAndrieu already wrote the corresponding section ✪

Manu Sporny: So line 4 is OBE; lets just strike it ✪

Joe Andrieu: I don't know if we did the first one though; ✪

Matt Stone: Can someone take an action to flesh this out a bit ✪

Manu Sporny: I think we should strike it because it's so open ended not because its done; it's not good to have action items open for months... ✪

Drummond Reed: I agree - working on privacy issues in the data model is going to be an ongoing task ✪

Drummond Reed: Better to break in down into specific tasks assigned to specific people ✪

Drummond Reed: As Manu is suggesting ✪

Manu Sporny: Nate has volunteered to put some text in the PR; and others are tagged to do stuff in github that negates the need for it ✪

Matt Stone: Can Manu take an action to make sure that's true? ✪

Manu Sporny: I'll assign people and if they don't want to do it they can unasign themselves ✪

Matt Stone: I added a more specific action to do that so that we can close the others ✪

Matt Stone: Done ✪

Matt Stone: Dlongley there are a few others hanging out here from previous meetings; rows 10 and 11; what's the status of those? ✪

Dan Burnett: They are done; i can sent out an email again if need be ✪

Dan Burnett: Closing topic action item review; next topic (last topic on the agenda) topics for next week ✪

Manu Sporny: Rebooting Web of Trust is coming up; we're trying to figure out some useful deployment work that we can accomplish in time for that ✪

Manu Sporny: ?? Is going to issue an id card that is a verifiable claim; if we could create an id card like the refugee one that's privacy enhancing which would demonstrate what we're doing relative to id2020 and show that its real and demonstrable ✪

Manu Sporny: Another idea: open badges and Kim and learning machine; the general pitch is 'can the group figure out a deployment project that we can get done in time for rebooting web of trust?' ✪

Joe Andrieu: Sounds cool; how should we explore it? ✪

Jonathan Holt: Refugee ID cards would make a nice topic and appropriate for the conference. ✪

Manu Sporny: I can start an email chain; if folks want to get involved then speak up! ✪

Manu Sporny: Also if you want to see a particular thing made real; real can also mean putting it in the playground ✪

Adam Lake: Amingus: please add me to the email. ✪

Joe Andrieu: Really just a question of whether we can get enough resources on it ✪

Adam Migus: Please add me to the email [scribe assist by Adam Lake] ✪

Manu Sporny: Are you suggesting Refugee ID cards as a specific project for the Rebooting the Web of Trust meeting? [scribe assist by Drummond Reed] ✪

Dan Burnett: Thanks to everyone who added comments to the Google doc. ✪

Dan Burnett: Also people who put requirements in it; changes might have been made so go back and check on it ✪

Manu Sporny: On requirements: Dan, at what point are we going to start prioritizing? ✪

Manu Sporny: General comment: we and amigus took the requirements and did an analysis of it relative to JOSE/JWT and how they could fit together (or not), whether they can be used to express VC stuff; we have an analysis doc; amigus: don't know when you might want to show it ✪

Adam Migus: It's weeks away, but in a few weeks we should bring it back to the group. [scribe assist by Manu Sporny] ✪

Matt Stone: Was the current view of the JOSE/JWT work now? ✪

Manu Sporny: Still too early but amigus will have something diffinitive to say once we get a little further ✪

Dan Burnett: I do need some folks to look at the comments I've already made but I'm short on time at the current moment; i'll free up in a week or week and a half at which point I'll take the next step of pushing forward on ordering to move discussions ahead ✪