The W3C Credentials Community Group

Verifiable Claims and Digital Verification

Go Back

Credentials CG Telecon

Minutes for 2019-10-15

Agenda
https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-credentials/2019Oct/0014.html
Topics
  1. Introductions and Reintroductions
  2. Announcements & Reminders
  3. Progress on Action Items
  4. DID handoff
  5. VC WG Maintenance Charter
  6. Contributing to JSON-LD Contexts
Organizer
Kim Hamilton Duffy, Christopher Allen, Joe Andrieu
Scribe
Yancy Ribbens
Present
Kim Hamilton Duffy, Amy Guy, Justin Richer, Dmitri Zagidulin, Markus Sabadello, Manu Sporny, Joe Andrieu, Dave Longley, Orie Steele, Chris Winczewski, Yancy Ribbens, Alexander Hripak, Ted Thibodeau, Christopher Allen, Kaliya Young, Ganesh Annan, Brent Zundel, Benjamin Young, Daniel Buchner, David I. Lehn, Kulpreet Singh, Shivam Sethi, Matt Stone
Audio Log
Kim Hamilton Duffy: : Https://www.w3.org/accounts/request
Yancy Ribbens is scribing.

Topic: Introductions and Reintroductions

Chris Winczewski: Joining from learning machine

Topic: Announcements & Reminders

Kim Hamilton Duffy: https://zoom.us/j/7077077007
Kim Hamilton Duffy: Still have dedicated DID calls happening
... did wg has been launched and is transitioning over
... I can help put you in touch with the right people to get involved in the DID wg
... closing out action items and work items
... the work items that are lingering without action, for example waiting for major input
... the chairs will be going through action items and work items
... we will be starting road map planning for next year
... if you do want to propose a new work item
... there is a github way to do it
... we don't want to force people to us github so i'm happy to help
... lastly we will start asking for scribes before the call
... incentive needs to be discussed
... maybe send some btc

Topic: Progress on Action Items

... chairs went through to see what can be closed out
Kaliya Young: +Present
... ryan grant was working on test cases for DID docs
... no action has happened for more than a year
... maybe this should be tracked in the DID WG
... I don't know if this issue is even needed
... does it make sense to migrate this to the DID WG?
Brent Zundel: From what it sounds like it's already in the charter
Orie Steele: #25 Seems stale, should be closed.
... not sure if theres value in moving over though
Manu Sporny: Agrees with Brent
Kim Hamilton Duffy: We have a Veres one method spec
... I get the need for a representative
Orie Steele: +1 For a good reference example for a did method spec.
Manu Sporny: I think I suggest closing the issue
... eventually the spec will reach 1.0 stable
... and we'll point people to it then
Kim Hamilton Duffy: I do think the topic of providing better examples for people
Manu Sporny: +1 To what kimhd said wrt. "more docs when we need it"
... if it's irritating that the same people are updating the method we can get someone in the community to support it
... now that the DID wg is formed, we want to transition items

Topic: DID handoff

Brent Zundel: We are looking to formerly close the ccg did spec and other did related repos
... we would like to begin that process
... feel it's time to archive the repo
Manu Sporny: Email says it all
Alexander Hripak: Handoff, there's a pun in there somewhere
Kim Hamilton Duffy: Please checkout the link
... now that the VC working group has finished, there's the idea of having a maintenance charter
... the ask is to have this work happen in the context of the ccg

Topic: VC WG Maintenance Charter

... going to ask once again to talk us through that
Manu Sporny: What's the best way to maintain the spec
... maybe restructure if it's worthwhile
... keep the VC extenstion registry going
... there's a proposal here to extend the WG into a maintenance
... the charter would be open for two years
... this group has always struggled to move fast
... this provides an opportunity to do so
... this is a way to extend it in an offical capacity
Kim Hamilton Duffy: What is needed from us?
Manu Sporny: Does this group think it's a good idea and stuff like that
... is what's needed
... looking for input and modifications and a resolution that the group has reviewed it
Kim Hamilton Duffy: CK ChristopherA
Christopher Allen: We are more than a liaison here
... I'm confused where we fit
Manu Sporny: The reason this group is being pulled into the discussion is for consensus around issues
Manu Sporny: This group is expected to coordinate with the Credentials Community Group on consensus-based proposals related to content changes for Verifiable Credentials Working Group Deliverables. The Chairs of this group may choose to reject proposals that are incompatible with this Charter.
Manu Sporny: Credentials Community Group
Manu Sporny: Research, incubation, and consensus-based proposals related to content for consideration by this group.
Kim Hamilton Duffy: What is this? is this a ccg work item?\
... chairs will want to know how to track
... it's up to this group to determine how to do that
Manu Sporny: How this group handles coordination with the VCWG is up to the CCG.
Christopher Allen: I suspect the right answer is to say that a work item is heading to another working group or IETF or whatever, when a work item is heading in this direction, this becomes another place they can submit results

Topic: Contributing to JSON-LD Contexts

Orie Steele: It's not obvious how to fix these issues in json-ld, which has lead to ignoring the json-ld
... my hope is that for the VC context and for the DID WG context, that we can create a single repo for it
... and make it easier to update
... I think there's been a recommendation already in the DID WG
... want to encourage wider context
Manu Sporny: I think what we're talking about here is a set of processes to update context and vocab
Dave Longley: +1 To Orie to keeping things together and enabling updates in a single PR
... the good news is we can do this
... so there are a number of questions that we need to tackle
... what do we do with context in production
... vs things that are green-field contexts
... and questions around vocab documents and we 've been ignoring the human readable entirley
... and two it is the best for us to keep it up to date
... and of course how do we get all groups on the same process
... I think a lot of this boils down to a process we have around the DID and VC context
... this boils down to this is the general approach
... dlongley has started with how to extend
Markus Sabadello: This is also being discussed in the new DID WG
... the other thing I wanted to say is when Orie raised the issue it was motivated by a PR
... and that leads to how to maintain the crypto suite
... that's all links to maintain the registry
Dave Longley: VC implementation guide: https://www.w3.org/TR/vc-imp-guide/
Manu Sporny: So markus raised a question around the VC and DID has this problem
... so the process is decentralized because there's a group that is in charge
... so they manage that
... we will push to the VCWG and this is one benefit of the ld approach
... other communities may require just like formal votes
Kim Hamilton Duffy: I'm guessing we don't need any further action
... sound like there's a lot of support for this approach
Manu Sporny: The issue you had is something the DID WG needs to discuss. the question is how big of a painpoint is this?
... and we should move on it in the next month
Orie Steele: Part of the pain is not understanding how the VC and DID contexts are linked
... the easy win here is in a readme someplace is a welcome to json-ld and here's what you need to know
... lots of conversations with people at IIW and I think ink the longer term we need to pull people into the community
Manu Sporny: Agree with everything Orie is saying...
... if people aren't going to use json-ld and they do want to uses a specific curve it can muddy the watters
... two phase process we should take
... first get guidance into readme
... and then if you're using json-ld here' what you need to do, and if not don't use it badly
... people don're read how it works
Kim Hamilton Duffy: The struggles are real
... I think this something the community could benefit a lot from
... Orie makes good points
... also general call for help
... I forgot we had VC implementation guide
... it would be nice to have our guidance be more discoverable
Dave Longley: Bigbluehat is working on a best practices doc for JSON-LD ... we should talk with the JSON-LD WG about what documents they are producing and give feedback to them.
Manu Sporny: Want to ack and agree
... the fact that there are still problems is really concerning
... the reasons it's around is it's a hard problem
... maybe people start reading about vc stuff through the did spec
Orie Steele: People don't read :(
... the other challenge is people don't read
... devs copying and pasting instead of reading
... a volume of code is cargo cult code
... and not because of curious issue but a time issue
... so it's not possible to undeerstand in deptch
... it's problem when I understand enough then I need to under stand
... once you hit the point there's next to no guidance
... you don't need to learn everything about linked data
... there's also a discussion about how to extend
... we do need to add to the guidance
... I'm at a loss for which readme to put it in
... I really wish this was at that entry point
... that's just a suggestion
Orie Steele: For sure the did-spec readme, not sure about VC...
... lets try to do a quick win and not get togher a write a book
Kim Hamilton Duffy: Something that was mentioned is that this would be good feedback from jsonld wg
... so part of having the successful community
Manu Sporny: Yes, +1 -- to put it to JSON-LD WG... and +1 to scalable, successful community -- we need /other/ volunteers... not the usual suspects, new folks willing to carry the torch forward.
Dave Longley: +1
... feels like we could do more to aggregate
Orie Steele: I've added some comments for the did-wg here: https://github.com/w3c/did-spec/issues/5
... Thanks Orie and Manu!
Orie Steele: :)
Manu Sporny: Thanks Orie ! :)
Manu Sporny: VoiP; disconnect b18