Joe Andrieu: There is a request to talk about Non Violent Communication, there was some engagement with Tzviya, anything else we would like to get on the Agenda for today? ✪
Joe Andrieu: We'll put you on the queue soon, Claire. ✪
Joe Andrieu: Announcements/reminders - Kim, mind giving us an update? ✪
Manu Sporny: There's an IEEE spectrum special issue, deadline 3 days ago, submission deadline is over, there will be peer review from now until December, and hopefully then a lot of great articles about the work we're doing here will be published, it's a big deal, big issue -- dealing with work here and at DIF and IIW, etc. [scribe assist by Dave Longley] ✪
Joe Andrieu: Sep 3-6th... then Sep 7-8th for ActivityPub folks. ✪
Manu Sporny: That community has pulled in some things we've done before and we'd like to have further alignment, if you care about messaging on the Web and making it secure and SS and all that stuff good community to join. [scribe assist by Dave Longley] ✪
Joe Andrieu: W3C TPAC is happening, DID WG already has a slot, that's in Fukuoka Japan... September is crazy, you'll be able to get frequent flyer miles! ✪
Joe Andrieu: Both opened by Kim, are you the best person to review those? ✪
Bill Barnhill: I can give a little update, I'm ok with closing original issue, we seem to be proceeding with Bikeshed. I can process Bikeshed in AWS, looking at it, though, there is a Travis CI approach -- better approach, have a document on how to install bikeshed on AWS/Ubuntu... additional tool, w??? HTML to PDF, give a PDF version of spec w/ PDF style bookmarks. Hoping to have a demo in short order. ✪
Joe Andrieu: I did see the request to get TravisCI approved... Kim approved it. ✪
Bill Barnhill: I'll be working on the TravisCI version tonight. ✪
Joe Andrieu: The other issue is JWK cryptosuite specs... these are from last week... sounds like we didn't review, just skip. ✪
Joe Andrieu: With apologies to Claire, Drummond has to leave in 10 minutes, we'll cover Claire's stuff after that. ✪
Joe Andrieu: Please jump onto the queue, any of the Editors of the charter/spec... the Chairs would like to bless this and move it to the next level, there is no requirement for a CG to be the source of the charter, looking for guidance. ✪
Manu Sporny: I'm deferring to Drummond and Markus to take us through it but from a process perspective, having a proposal and resolution from the group is really helpful. Shows more than a handful of people that reviewed it. [scribe assist by Dave Longley] ✪
Manu Sporny: Tony just raised a bunch of issues last night, we don't have to process those but it's good form. [scribe assist by Dave Longley] ✪
Manu Sporny: We want the group to say we should progress the charter to the next stage, modulo any editorial changes and that we are ready for W3M to put it to a vote at this point. [scribe assist by Dave Longley] ✪
Drummond Reed: Looks l ike Tony has added 7 issues over the last 24 hours... ✪
Drummond Reed: I directly responded to some of them. I believe that Tony Nadalin is not operating within the bounds of civility and that I strongly believe... we held two calls just to process his issues... huge thanks to Manu for coordinating suggestions/changes, we had markus, brent, joe, lots of others contributed. ✪
Drummond Reed: I think we have a superb charter, we propose that we submit this to W3C to move forward. ✪
Drummond Reed: If we kept doing this, we're playing whack-a-mole for a long time, so I think we're done, we have a solid charter. ✪
Christopher Allen: As a Chair, if the Editor's feel there is merit, let's handle them... but, Tony has never joined this group, Microsoft isn't a member of the CCG, he's raising these issues again at the last minute, I don't interpret any of his suggestions as being principled objections... it feels like W3C Process abuse. ✪
Christopher Allen: If it came to me, I don't think we need to respond to his concerns at this point. ✪
Bill Barnhill: Don not minute pleas, but I’d like to note, as an additional data point, that I perceived the same situation when we were trying to get the Open Reputation Management Systems (ORMS) Technical Committee going on OASIS in 2008. The perceived source of the issues at that time was again Mr. Nadalin. ✪
Dan Burnett: Any member can propose a WG... the real question is what's going to happen once the proposal goes out. Even if Tony Nadalin objects, it's better that that's visible and public at this point... we will have an opportunity to respond and describe how extensive our work has been to date to address his concerns. ✪
Dan Burnett: At this point, there is no point trying to address Tony's concerns by ourselves. ✪
Joe Andrieu: I'd like to say two things... 1) There have been debates within the issues where Tony Nadalin, where Tony says "Do X", and the language was already in the spec to "Do X". There is concern that he's just rifing off concerns. ✪
Joe Andrieu: On the other hand, Tony and others I won't name, some of those objections have made the charter/spec better. ✪
Drummond Reed: I do agree that some of Tony's issues have made the charter better. But it has gone past the point of diminishing returns. ✪
Joe Andrieu: I have appreciated Kim, Manu, and Dan's attempts to bring Tony into the fold, and we have gone way above and beyond in doing that. ✪
Dan Burnett is scribing.
Jonathan Holt: Appreciate that we are closers, but in IPFS we have discourse process. ✪
... for example, some issues can be closed as not relevant
Kim Hamilton Duffy: Want to close charter and move to vote. not everything has to be decided in advance of a WG. Maybe let's propose moving them to "after WG formed" ✪
... If we don't believe his issues should block vote, we should just move them
Joe Andrieu: We have tried to get Tony involved. Asked him to join, emailed, had workshop in Seattle where Tony refused to address issues. We have tried in multiple forums. ✪
Jonathan Holt: Just want a place for conversations outside of filing issues. ✪
Joe Andrieu: CCG list would be good, but he hasn't joined ✪
Drummond Reed: I have to leave the call now, but I want to +1 a proposal to submit the DID WG Charter as currently drafted. ✪
... if chairs raise proposal and it passes, then CG has agreed. Doesn't mean no more changes will occur, since W3M has the final say. W3C Management will have to deal with Tony's new issues if they want to.
PROPOSAL: The W3C Credentials Community Group has reviewed the DID WG Charter Proposal, has gathered public review and applied changes, and suggests that W3C Management moves forward with sending the DID WG Charter to the W3C Advisory Committee for final approval.
Joe Andrieu: Proposal passes with strong consensus ✪
RESOLUTION: The W3C Credentials Community Group has reviewed the DID WG Charter Proposal, has gathered public review and applied changes, and suggests that W3C Management moves forward with sending the DID WG Charter to the W3C Advisory Committee for final approval.
... manu please take to W3C
Manu Sporny: When we forward proposal W3C already knows about it. We can let them know about Tony's new issues, but they are expecting it. ✪
... once they make any edits, it will go out to AC. Hopefully will be approved before TPAC.
... now is when we go around and get as many votes as we can. Urge all member companies you know to approve.
... need a minimum of 25 votes. VCWG holds the record for most number of positive vwotes. Let's get 50-60 for DIDs. We want to show strong broad support.
Joe Andrieu: Two years of work starts when the group begins :) ✪
Manu Sporny: +1 To heather. Everyone in group stands to do better wrt communication. It is easy to misinterpret. However, Tony has consistent behavior over 4 years across multiple groups in multiple standards orgs . ✪
... Tony's behavior is the worst i have ever seen anywhere
Manu Sporny: We don't know why he does it, but it is incredibly destructive. For those seeing it for the first time, you need to know he is not operating in good faith. Really aggressive behavior that is antisocial. ✪
Heather Vescent: Appreciate that background Manu, IMO the solution is to remove him in that case. ✪
... that said, i'm pleased that Clare is here to talk about how this can be a safe and positive environment. It takes constant work to make sure that we live up to that.
Heather Vescent: And that is a perspective of the leadership model that I mentioned, that if someone is not contributing to the forward movement of the work, then it is the leaders responsibility to resolve it, if only by removing the impact of that person. ✪
Manu Sporny: Thanks for listening, heathervescent ... it's up to all of us to determine how to interact with him appropriately. ✪
Manu Sporny is scribing.
Topic: Non-Violent Communication
Claire Rumore: My background in NVC is from a background in social sciences... how this relates to group cohesion. Non Violent Communication is one methodology and it's widely known, I am no master, but I have enough skill to make an introduction of the methodology for the group. ✪
Claire Rumore: If we feel like this is useful, we can bring in a specialist. Moses raised about problematic communication that may be happening. NVC may or may not be useful to him. If he is resistant to being a group participant, it may not work, but you could use NVC to heal rifts. ✪
Claire Rumore: There are 4 tenents to NVC - Observations, Feelings, Needs, and Requests ✪
Claire Rumore: I put an overview of NVC in our paper... ✪
Claire Rumore: All four of those things are important... It's clear that Tony has Needs that he's not communicating, and we need to understand those needs. He is clearly raising lots of Feelings in the group... he seeks being listened to in a particular way. When the group is put on defense, then we can't listen, and the group isn't able to process his concerns. ✪
Dan Burnett: Tony is a special case. We shouldn't make the NVC conversation about him. ✪
Claire Rumore: I'm going to do a 15 minute demonstration in Prague, to highlight how this happens. ✪
Claire Rumore: Tony may be a special case, that's for this group to decide. ✪
Claire Rumore: However, NVC can help the rest of the group that want to b e team players... ✪
Dan Burnett: +1 To bending over backwards to work with those who want to contribute productively ✪
Claire Rumore: Otherwise, this group has good cohesion... aggression is not helpful in any group... ✪
Moses Ma: Tony is an opportunity. I'm being serious. ✪
Joe Andrieu: Dan Burnett, mentioned that let's not apply this to Tony because he's a special case... but many of us wanted to apply NVC to this community. ✪
Joe Andrieu: I grew up with 4 siblings and fought all of the time, it's second nature for me to be aggressive... it feels good for me to take the gloves off... I like conflict, but it's not always the most productive habit, and I'm very excited given the opportunity to learn more about NVC and adopt more of it's practices. Speaking as a CCG Chair and RWoT board member, let's do something in Prague. ✪
Joe Andrieu: And then let's figure out how to flow it into here. ✪
Moses Ma: I wanted to have all of you to consider Tony as a special opportunity... we should go talk with specialists in NVC, invite Tony to that meeting. ✪
Moses Ma: I don't think I asked Claire to join the list, trying to reduce amount of work we all have to do, please forward. ✪
Manu Sporny: The PWE is interested in NVC, and I'll try to make that connection. ✪
Joe Andrieu: No problem ending the call early, very happy about the DID WG Proposal. Thank you for bringing NVC to the group and W3C, Claire and Moses, we really appreciate it. ✪