The W3C Credentials Community Group

Verifiable Claims and Digital Verification

Go Back

Credentials CG Telecon

Minutes for 2018-01-30

Agenda
https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-credentials/2018Jan/0073.html
Topics
  1. Introductions and Reintroductions
  2. Agenda for Today
  3. Action Items
  4. CG Process
  5. Data Minimization
  6. Education Task Force
Resolutions
  1. Merge PR 41 into the main specification based on no objections, we have achieved consensus on this PR.
Action Items
  1. Ryan Grant to submit Pull Request to update bad links.
  2. Mike Lodder to invite Jan Camenisch to crypto Tuesday
  3. CCG to create VC examples repo.
Organizer
Joe Andrieu, Kim Hamilton Duffy, Christopher Allen
Scribe
Joe Andrieu
Present
Moses Ma, Lionel Wolberger, Joe Andrieu, Bob Dolan, Kim Hamilton Duffy, Manu Sporny, Ryan Grant, Mike Lodder, Ted Thibodeau, Christopher Allen, Nate Otto, David Chadwick, Kerri Lemoie, Bohdan Andriyiv, Stuart Sutton, Jarlath O'Carroll, Serge Ravet, David I. Lehn, Benjamin Young
Audio Log
Moses Ma: I'm leaving in 30 minutes
Lionel Wolberger: Conference line keeps disconnecting
Joe Andrieu is scribing.

Topic: Introductions and Reintroductions

Bob Dolan: Background in cognitive neuroscience
... research scientist for years with Pearson
... now focused in k-12

Topic: Agenda for Today

Kim Hamilton Duffy: Focus today on the Education task force
Manu Sporny: May want to cover uport blog post
Manu Sporny: If you're writing about the work of the community
... please share credit for the groups that have been incubating these ideas
... IIW, RWOT, W3C, DIF
Kim Hamilton Duffy: Next week is our first Crypto Tuesday
... we'll be talking about Selective and Minimal disclosure
Kim Hamilton Duffy: Dv suites: https://w3c-dvcg.github.io/
... we'll also be reviewing the digital verification suites
... we iterate these as needed, and now it time to focus on them
... Feb 13 we'll be discussing linked datas capabilities, aka OCAP
... Upcoming events
Manu Sporny: New LDOCAP spec: https://w3c-ccg.github.io/ld-ocap/
... Implementers standup ~Feb 19
Kim Hamilton Duffy: RWOT: https://rwot6.eventbrite.com
... RWOT VI Mar 6-8 in Santa Barbara
... that Monday a RWOT Disc Golf Tourney
... IIW April 3-5
... Post IIW Verifiable Claims Face-to-Face April 5,6

Topic: Action Items

Manu Sporny: DID Spec Harmonization: https://github.com/w3c-ccg/did-spec/pull/41
Manu Sporny: There is a pull request for DID spec harmonization
... talked about this on the DID task force call
... talked about this last week, no objections
... so unless there are objections here, we'll pull this in
Ryan Grant: There are a couple places in the security section that needs help. This isn't an objection, but there are places that need fixing.
Manu Sporny: We'll be doing further PRs
... so let's pull in those comments as new PR
ACTION: Ryan Grant to submit Pull Request to update bad links.
Mike Lodder: On the queue for Drummond
... On the subject of DID. Great talk with Sam Smith
... Should be posted tomorrow
... Final DID spec call this week
Kim Hamilton Duffy: Do we need a final +1?
Manu Sporny: That's a good idea
PROPOSAL: Merge PR 41 into the main specification based on no objections, we have achieved consensus on this PR.
Joe Andrieu: +1
Kim Hamilton Duffy: +1
Manu Sporny: +1
Ted Thibodeau: +1
Christopher Allen: +1
Ryan Grant: +1
RESOLUTION: Merge PR 41 into the main specification based on no objections, we have achieved consensus on this PR.
Christopher Allen: Discounts with paper!
Joe Andrieu: Can I post RWOT details to VCWG? [scribe assist by Kim Hamilton Duffy]
Manu Sporny: Yes [scribe assist by Kim Hamilton Duffy]
Joe Andrieu: I'll get something out to both email lists
Manu Sporny: Question for Joe
Nate Otto: I'm sure my paper will come in less than a week before the event. Will purchase my ticket and travel for RWOT in the next couple days.
... if someone is writing a paper, do we have to submit that before buying?
Joe Andrieu: Not at all.
... You should be able to buy tickets before the paper.
Joe Andrieu: Almost done with engagement model [scribe assist by Kim Hamilton Duffy]
Kim Hamilton Duffy: ...Will be released through RWoT but we'll pull it in here
David Chadwick: Under lifecycle model item...
Joe Andrieu: Would like to review engagement model with ccg [scribe assist by Kim Hamilton Duffy]
... did post something 1/17. That was responded too.
... last week we discussed PRs for the spec
... so that's my new action item
Manu Sporny: I had problems hearing you...
... I did see that email
... PRs are a good way to engage
... And Manu will work with you to incorporate your feedback
... Last week's meeting it got documented as feedback on DID spec... but its not.
... it's feedback for the data model document
Mike Lodder: I also do not hear every syllable [scribe assist by Lionel Wolberger]
Christopher Allen: Continued audio problems with DavidC
David Chadwick: I think its something with my microphone. I can hear you all well

Topic: CG Process

Christopher Allen: One of our agenda items is to define what is the process we are doing with the ccg
... Some things are already defined by W3C
... but then, within our own process since our reboot last summer,
... we want to document was new in the kinds of things we do
... if you have thoughts about how we should run things, let us know
... Joe and I are working on a draft we'll make available to the group

Topic: Data Minimization

Lionel Wolberger: Data Minimization Paper
... there has been progress
... fine tuning last draft
... moving forward
Christopher Allen: Next week we'll touch on the paper
... that's Crypto Tuesday and that will be our first topic
ACTION: Mike Lodder to invite Jan Camenisch to crypto Tuesday
Lionel Wolberger: ... There is a CL section in the document. Might be good to reach out to Jan.
... Also maybe we can reach out to Dan Larimer?

Topic: Education Task Force

Kim Hamilton Duffy: We're launching the Education and Life Long Learning Task Force (name may change)
... we going to overview the work we have in mind
... we see the CCG as a good fit with this education work
... Nate Otto and Kerri Lemoie will talk about it
... Long been an interest in Open Badges and verifiable credentials
... a desire for a more lightweight specification
... we've gotten more motivated to engage on that.
... we see this eventually resulting in requirements from education
... for example, in verifiable claims, examples are things like driver's license or other IDs given to you
... in education formal needs are important,
... but so are endorsements that, say, a peer gives
... The other thing we see as potential deliverable is a draft specification
... for where we want to see an Open Badges Verifiable Credential standard
...also technical prototyping
Nate Otto: We think that through this work we could outline what changes might be needed to these associated specifications to make sure they have a happy future together. For example, "Add Linked Data Signatures as a new available signing method for Open Badges"
Kim Hamilton Duffy: Priorities include engaging the broader community
...we want to be able to express open badges as verifiable credentials
...we see an open badges being wrapped by verifiable credential, using linked-data signatures
...we are trying to let Open Badges *use* the tools of the VCWG and community
Nate Otto: https://github.com/w3c-ccg/edu_occ_verifiable_credentials/blob/master/open_badge_assertions_as_verifiable_credentials.md Whoops just noticed one tiny issue with this -- reusing the "recipient_did" so intent is ambiguous. The claim should have its own unique DID as id, and we would use the "did:example:recipient_did" as the recipient.identity
...recipent owned credentials are important
...and LD signatures compatibility
Kerri Lemoie: http://credreg.net/
...next up: Credential Engine Registry
Kerri Lemoie: Applications can use the registry for free
... archived by Internet Archive
... over 200 fields to define credentials
Nate Otto: The Credential Engine Registry is available at https://credentialfinder.com/
...this is a proposal for further discussions
Kim Hamilton Duffy: Features to add to Open Badges
... 1. amending an assertion with further evidence
... 2. identification of an evidence provider
Christopher Allen: (Schema link to credentials finder: http://credreg.net/ctdl/terms)
... also the idea of credentials that aren't valid until counter-signed
... this is vital for GDPR
Kerri Lemoie: The counter sign ability is yet another level of verifiability
... sometimes credentials are issued without the subject's knowledge or with info they didn't intend to publicize
Kim Hamilton Duffy: This brings up issues of different parties at different phases is the credential lifecycle
Kerri Lemoie: Ongoing conversation, issue that the creator of the badge is presumed to be the issuer
... his has complications, but simplifies things in others
Mike Lodder: Is there a use case for issuing a credential without the subject's knowledge?
Nate Otto: Both the BadgeClass and the Assertion may have an "issuer" property. Currently in Open Badges 2.0 only the BadgeClass identifies its "issuer", and the Assertion's creator is assumed to be the same as the BadgeClass's.
... we've discussed different technical issues about types and whether there is a finite list
... Which raises questions of what verifiability means
Nate Otto: We've outlined some of the use cases for allowing Assertion to have an "issuer" that is different on the openbadges specification here: https://github.com/IMSGlobal/openbadges-specification/issues/75
Kim Hamilton Duffy: So there are a range of topics the task force would address
... and we'd live to have a good place to continue this conversation and document what we're doing and going through a consensus process to understand use cases and requirements
... and feed into different specs that might be implemented
Bohdan Andriyiv: I wanted to raise a question
... why do we want to wrap open badges into verifiable credentails? I have a propsal...
... why not have Open Badges *be* a verifiable credential
... maybe that's a simpler way. using optional properties.
... I'll post the idea in the open badges group
Kim Hamilton Duffy: Great. let's get that into the conversation.
... I look forwrd to reviewing your approach
Kerri Lemoie: +1 To further discussions on drabiv's thinking
Manu Sporny: This is all great.
... fantastic to discuss how to make all these technologies work together
... super excited about possibilities for alignment with Open Badges
... bringing in from VCWG
Nate Otto: I suspect that Bohdan (drabiv) and we are proposing very similar modifications to Open Badges to allow the expression of "entity earned a <defined credential>" using the Verifiable Credentials syntax.
Manu Sporny: Lots of folks who want to create VCs, but there is little guidance about how to do that
... developers want examples
... so maybe the community needs to start creating an example catalog
Kim Hamilton Duffy: +1
...is there anyone else in the community that wants to help with that?
Christopher Allen: +1
Mike Lodder: I'm interested
... we need this
Mike Lodder: +1
... here's the registry, here's where you can see how to do it
Kerri Lemoie: +1 To examples and assistance in crafting them. Great way to learn.
... Seeing some +1s
... maybe this is an additional discussion
Kim Hamilton Duffy: Absolutely. that's one of the biggest areas we (the educational task force) are working on
Mike Lodder: I can't speak for the Sovrin community as a whole but I believe they will want this
... examples of how the current specs would be used for educational use cases
Christopher Allen: An example repo with
... submitted for review, reviewed,
... with a bunch of JSON-LD examples
... we could accumulate examples to review
... then go through them collectively and unwind problems and improve them as examples
... also, I'd be interested from an education world, counter-signed claims
...I've long desired that for RWOT use cases, GDPR, and other cases.
... I'd like to get the requirements for that more clear.
... I understand *my* reason and GDPR reasons, and I'd like to understand the education uses of that
Mike Lodder: This is this why Evernym uses CL signatures
Kerri Lemoie: +1 ChristoperA
Kim Hamilton Duffy: There is a section in VC data model...
Mike Lodder: They involve both the issuer and the subject to jointly sign a claim
... in the case of educational claims we need to be more explicit about the privacy trade-offs we're making
Kim Hamilton Duffy: Any specific thoughts from education community?
Nate Otto: Welcome Stuart to today's call!
Stuart Sutton: This is Stuart Sutton from the credential engine
Jarlath O'Carroll: +1
... we are highly supportive of the work of this group.
... happy to contribute
Serge Ravet: Happy to contribute too :-)
Nate Otto: Stuart, could you possibly make it to Santa Barbara for https://rwot6.eventbrite.com in March?
Christopher Allen: I have a request...
... I'd love to see from the educational task force, some peer-to-peer use cases
... e.g., "I've seen lots of Joe's javascript. It's high quality"
Kerri Lemoie: +1 To including peer-to-peer in use cases
Nate Otto: Welcome Szerge (Serge Ravet) to the call!
Nate Otto: We Open Badges and CredReg folks have brought in some newcomers to today's CCG call.
Kim Hamilton Duffy: The work Szerge has been doing with Nate is pulling in a lot of interesting European context
Serge Ravet: I'm developing the [x] alliance
... working on forms of recognition
Serge Ravet: Open recognition alliance
Manu Sporny: Awesome, welcome to the group Szerge!
Kerri Lemoie: Serge is from the Open Recognition Alliance http://openrecognition.org
ACTION: CCG to create VC examples repo.
Kerri Lemoie: Thank you!!
Kim Hamilton Duffy: That's a wrap. Thanks everyone.