Manu Sporny: We need people to do a review, to see that nothing was missed, and that it represents the consensus ✪
Joe Andrieu: Clarifies that "DID hardening" is ongoing ✪
Manu Sporny: Preferred method at this point is github pull requests ✪
Joe Andrieu: Proposal - thursday group offers explanation ✪
Drummond Reed: Proposal - continue Thursday calls only to cover remaining issues ✪
Joe Andrieu: One of the risks is that some of the tuesday regulars can't make it on thursday, and there's a potential fork in consensus. now is a good time for anyone interested to review and make sure their feedback is integrated. ✪
Joe Andrieu: Does hope to get engagement model - maybe February ✪
Topic: Outreach
Joe Andrieu: Outreach cn be taken to email, but... ✪
Joe Andrieu: We'd like to get an inventory of verfiable claim libraries ✪
Manu Sporny: Multiple interoperable implementations ✪
Manu Sporny: Demonstrate that there are people who would join the working group ✪
Manu Sporny: These things need to be added to the chart ✪
Nate Otto: Interesting that TPAC will be October in France. The organizers of ePIC (themes: ePortfolios, Blockchains, Open Badges, and Identities) were considering Paris or Lyon for October 2018 as well. Maybe they could attach their event on the front or back of TPAC. ✪
Manu Sporny: Let's add the chart to the landing page ✪
ACTION: chairs ensure we're sending out info about RWoT in Santa Barbara (if not already in progress)
Christopher Allen: We're missing a huge category: data verification ✪
Christopher Allen: Early in our charter, we said we were not going to start a separate group for that ✪
Christopher Allen: There is probably a whole column here ✪
Christopher Allen: Would love to see manu redraw column1, and dave redraw column2 ✪
Joe Andrieu: We have overlap with data verification group, but are you considering a new toplevel or new final reports? ✪
Christopher Allen: Maybe manu can answer what the process is ✪
Joe Andrieu: We have not really integrated the work of that group into our work, and it shows up in its absence here. let's get some boxes on here that are specifically carrying on the work of the data verification group. ✪
Joe Andrieu: For col1 and col2, manu's feedback on 1.1.1 ✪
Joe Andrieu: For 1.1.2, not really sure what the future of that is ✪
Manu Sporny: Digital verification: there's no process on what we need to do, other than naturally progress the specs based on their need ✪
Manu Sporny: The specs are moving ahead because of what we need out of them ✪
Manu Sporny: W3C staff conversations regarding specs that are using things that don't have specs behind them, are good reasons to start a working group. ✪
Manu Sporny: Problem is that W3C normally doesn't start such small working groups ✪
Manu Sporny: Standard chaining is one of the ways that these things get moving ✪
Manu Sporny: We don't have a very clear route for the signature stuff ✪
Manu Sporny: There seem to be a lot of people pulling for the DID spec ✪
Manu Sporny: If we can prove the DID spec has enough interst, and that the people working on these things are the same, then VCWG could move there -- we could combine groups. ✪
Manu Sporny: No idea how we move signature suites forward ✪
Drummond Reed: Manu, I thought that you thought the DID spec would go into the VCWG? Why has that changed? ✪
Manu Sporny: DID spec is most likely to transition to a WG, and it might be its own WG, or with verifiable claims ✪
Manu Sporny: Update LDS spec, and write spec for koblitz signature suite, and write signature suite for the signatures that Sovrin are using ✪
Joe Andrieu: Are those eventually going to be proposed recommendations? ✪
Christopher Allen: They will eventually fit under 1.1.3 ✪
Christopher Allen: A number of these things we will be talking about on "crypto tuesdays" ✪
Joe Andrieu: We'll put that in 1.1.3, and get that updated ✪
Manu Sporny: The weason we don't know which working group, is that they are trying to get very focused with working groups ✪
Manu Sporny: We may be able to craft some text that VCs are using DIDs, so it fits there ✪
Manu Sporny: Largely it's driven by W3C management, and they're focused on reducing overhead, but we don't know ✪