Wayne Vaughn: There is a DIF interop meeting happening now [scribe assist by Manu Sporny] ✪
Manu Sporny is scribing.
Wayne Vaughn: I am one of the new Chairs in the group, going to do Agenda Review ✪
Wayne Vaughn: Big items - election updates, work item maturity process, working on items -- what's the process? ✪
Wayne Vaughn: How should work items be updated, document update, feedback, then high level feedback on active work items. ✪
Wayne Vaughn: With new chairs, best to revisit with the new Chairs. The goal here is if you're reading meeting notes, or if you're here, you should have ability to get involved w/ work items. ✪
Wayne Vaughn: Also, insight into existing work items. ✪
Wayne Vaughn: Anyone can participate in these calls, all substantive contributions must come from people that have signed the Intellectual Property Rights agreement. You don't need to join mailing list, but you do need to sign IPR to make sure your contributions are open. ✪
Wayne Vaughn: Minutes and audio records are archived on Github - we use IRC to queue speakers during call and take minutes. Type present+ to get yourself on attendees list. ✪
Wayne Vaughn: To add yourself to the queue do: q+ ✪
Wayne Vaughn: We need a scribe, manu is volunteering. ✪
Topic: Introductions and Reintroductions
Wayne Vaughn: Anyone new that has joined these calls? Don't be shy. :) ✪
Kim Hamilton Duffy: Taylor Kendall, can you do it? ✪
Taylor Kendall: Taylor Kendall, Learning economy foundation, decade in higher ed, future proofing, systems level work in hgiher ed, library of congress, us department of ed, looking at blockchain, learning economy infrastructure level R&D for future of education work. Varied background, but lot of what we do maps to what W3C is doing. ✪
Wayne Vaughn: Thanks so much, Taylor, anyone else want to introduce themselves? ✪
Topic: Announcements and Reminders
Wayne Vaughn: Today, DIF F2F is happening... announcements link, DIF is an orgnaization in the ecosystem, they decided to have a meeting there. ✪
Kim Hamilton Duffy: The DIF event is happening for a few hours after this meeting, so please join if you want to learn more about what they're up to. it's free ✪
Wayne Vaughn: Identiverse started today, spanning everything across 3 weeks - greatful for that - one small item that we have time for, hopefully, Manu had mentioned that DID Registry closing of repo, if we have time, would like to spend time on that to hear abou tthe issues, DID Registry move somewhere else, leave some questions there. ✪
Wayne Vaughn: Also, manu you have no idea how hard i fought for the wayne handle on freenode ✪
Kim Hamilton Duffy: This was our first election, we learned a lot - we created an issue to track the process... there was email thread about individuals vs. companies, vote by particular date was ambiguous/buried... the method of voting, the last one... few people who voted were not members according to proper voting list. ✪
Kim Hamilton Duffy: There might be several causes of confusion, sometimes people leave company and update affiliation, some people join mailing list and not the group. ✪
Kim Hamilton Duffy: Some are DID WG members, not CCG members, created issue ... BUT election results are valid, this didn't affect election in any way, new Chairs will need to address these things. People that are not members but not contributing, will need them to sign IPR agreements. ✪
Kim Hamilton Duffy: How can we make this better for our future selves? Companies or individuals can vote w/o having a gun to our head, making this up at the last minute, we need to make some clarifications to our process going forward. ✪
Kim Hamilton Duffy: Also wanted to thank oru vote counters... Ivan was or "International Elections Observer" to oversee our flawed voting process. ✪
Kim Hamilton Duffy: We got to a valid election result despite those issues. ✪
Joe Andrieu: I just wanted to congratulate Heather and wish her the best of luck. ✪
Kim Hamilton Duffy: We had 39-ish total votes, had to discard 9 because people joined after cut off, others thought they were members but were not. ✪
Kim Hamilton Duffy: Either way, we ran it, it didn't affect the outcome. ✪
Wayne Vaughn: Just wanted to thank both Joe and Chris over their time in the group, hope they stick around and help us with their wisdom. ✪
Wayne Vaughn: New work items - how do they attain maturity? ✪
Heather Vescent: Just wanted to say thank you to the CCG and everyone that voted, exceited to bring my talents and skills to this communjity. Thank you to Joe and Chris, they've definitely put in a lot of work to bring CCG to where it is. Looking forward to building on that base with Kim and Wayne to take it to a new level. ✪
Heather Vescent: If anyone would like to reach out and chat with me, concerns, diversity items, my "office" is always open - feel free to contact me via email, DM, however you see fit. ✪
Wayne Vaughn: Great, thank you Heather and congratulations again. ✪
Kim Hamilton Duffy: We reviwed this a while back, now that we have a new set of chairs, lots of work items going on in group, good time to revisit it, scan through document, when we've done our job well, we're not quite there yet, but when we get there, you don't need to know existence of this document. ✪
Kim Hamilton Duffy: We want to udnerstand and provide tools/support that we can to shepherd items through the process... we don't want people to read 13 page document to figure out how to move a work item through. Second point, playing on what Heather just said, how to make this more inclusive... make work items such that people don't have to be familiar with technical tools to get work item through. ✪
Kim Hamilton Duffy: This document calls out opportunities to clarify, you can still think this is a work in progress, Chairs can look at new opportunities. Going to make this quick, orient you to this document, types of work items, flow... look at TLDR -40K foot view. All work items follow this flow chart. ✪
Kim Hamilton Duffy: Proposal, adoption, two paths whther it is ongoing community draft, of community report draft... ✪
Kim Hamilton Duffy: Community report draft, DID spec, VC spec, stuff like that ✪
Kim Hamilton Duffy: Ongoing community draft are stuff like registries ✪
Kim Hamilton Duffy: Ongoing community draft on page 3 ✪
Kim Hamilton Duffy: If you go to 20K foot view, on page 4, more details called out... once we get into actual work progress, community report draft, big blue-green-ish box, you see that work items go from rough draft phase to Github, unreleased draft, current work items in this state right now. ✪
Kim Hamilton Duffy: The Editors decide when the item is ready, tag repo with git release number, that ends up being a released draft, editors have to ensure IPR protection, request chairs to publish, to get to published draft. ✪
Kim Hamilton Duffy: Once W3C staff approves, Chair vetting, you get final report... there are early escapes due to inactivity - combination people being unclear about the process and also opportunity now to start encouraging shepherding things along. Two notes about this, very github heavy, in rough draft phase, for certain work items, it may be possible to do early iterations out of Github, still means that people / Editors still need to be aware of who is ✪
Contributing, we need IP release, but for some work items, if they are not a draft spec, might be reasonable to do a lot of iterations outside of github, once inside Github, it's done. ✪
Kim Hamilton Duffy: Possible chairs might supply support / automation to make things easier. Open question. ✪
Kim Hamilton Duffy: Lastly on Github-ness - Christopher found some integration that might help w/ Github version management, primary thing people interact with is not Github... but hack.md ✪
Kim Hamilton Duffy: Not clear that - that may be ismple commits, not releases, still want to provide solution for that... that's the major process, still some challenges that need to be worked on. ✪
Kim Hamilton Duffy: On page 5, representative example. ✪
Kim Hamilton Duffy: How do you propose a work item? ✪
Kim Hamilton Duffy: What we did was take the details outlined in this document and turned it into a Github template. ✪
Kim Hamilton Duffy: This page, bottom of page 8, demonstrates how to use new work item template. ✪
Kim Hamilton Duffy: You go to community repo in CCG, click on new issue, CCG new work item template, get started, and it prompts you to fill out what you need to get work item started. ✪
Kim Hamilton Duffy: You need to link to draft proposal, identify some editors, then all the rest is handled in Github template, labeled correctly, chairs can handle, rest is filling in details, won't go into too much there. ✪
Wayne Vaughn: The W3C CCG is one of the most powerful platforms that we have to move these things forward. ✪
Christopher Allen: As Wayne just said, we are not a standards orgnaization, we don't have the right to be able to create an international standard, however, we can incubate specifications, notes, so that they have the opportunity to become international standards. That's our unique role. ✪
Christopher Allen: To that end, we have to be careful about IPR, other things, but don't have to have rigour that DID spec is going through right now... DID Spec is on its way to be international standard in international process and WG. ✪
Christopher Allen: Our job is to get things prepped so things can take off and waynee the world. ✪
Christopher Allen: All of these things don't start with full consensus and full unanimity... ✪
Christopher Allen: You can have work items in this group start fairly small, you can start work items that conflict with other work items, the only time we require uniminity, when we get to end of process, we don't need principled objections. ✪
Christopher Allen: Once we get stuff done here, they move onto standards track at W3C, IETF... Chairs are here to help everyone along ... don't want things to get stalled in unreleased drafts. ✪
Christopher Allen: We might be able to use Hackmd - like Google Docs but uses Markdown - halfway between developer oriented Github and corporate-centric like Google Docs. ✪
Christopher Allen: Looking forward to working on these things w/ the group. ✪
Kim Hamilton Duffy: The Verifiable Credentials for Education (VCED) group is defining VCs in context of Education - first work item, still in progress... ✪
Kim Hamilton Duffy: There is a lot of work in our community, effort in how you express skills, onen good thing is there is interest in Linked Data to specify precise skills and competencies, more interesting long running effort. ✪
Kim Hamilton Duffy: People don't necessarily just want to issue diplomas and transcripts, but things you learn throughout course or lifelong learning... as an example, tradition credential would be "I attended a course" credential, but doesn't say if you're competent in skills. ✪
Kim Hamilton Duffy: Competency-based approach would be issuing competency credential along the way. ✪
Kim Hamilton Duffy: We got in touch with a lot of people writing these Education standards, sheer amount of work done in it, know there is a lot of work going on to express those as Linked Data, rewriting cirriculum, waynee how you write a course description and what's learned throughout around that. ✪
Kim Hamilton Duffy: Wanted to start out with use cases to issue VCs so that people can start issuing with some good references/models... one thing we noticed at interopathon, university degree credentials, what advice can we give people wanting to represent that, more meaningful data, vocabs back to it, schemas, vocabs, taxonomies can it be linked to? ✪
Kim Hamilton Duffy: We want to see possible approaches for people to use there... called out some examples, course program certificate, diploma, European open skills assertion, competency based assertions. Transcripts and EDCI - point to legal signature requirements, both in state where dominant schemas/formats use XML. ✪
Kim Hamilton Duffy: Love educational credentials, however time check on this work item [scribe assist by Wayne Vaughn] ✪
Kim Hamilton Duffy: We've talked about this , what can we do for nearer term, for EDCI, reason to use XML is legally binding signature requirements, get in new signature method ... trying to provide a place where reference examples can be provided. We're not a standards body, we're working w/ other educational standards bodies to take recommendations and apply those in educational data standards. ✪
Kim Hamilton Duffy: We're focusing on things exploring in educational space. Work with existing educational methods. We focus on education and lifelong education, not just higher university use cases. Really a function of who shows up, modelling education credentials document was reflection of types of prototypes people are trying to build. Please join if you're interested. ✪
Wayne Vaughn: What is a task force and how do you start one? ✪
Kim Hamilton Duffy: Task Force work on community drafts, you start it up, like DID Resolution Task Force, people are deciding they wanted to work on a problem, ongoing problem, yo udon't want to use all CCG time to work on it. ✪
Kim Hamilton Duffy: You basically start it up - announce the meeting time, follow same rules of making sure IPR release, all that, but then you just set a meeting time that's convenient for attendees. For that, ask Chairs if you have questions for what's involved, recordings, taking minutes. ✪
Kim Hamilton Duffy: Don't want to overly emphasize that, we're in process of revisiting how we do all of this. There is some mailing list discussion about using Zoom, Wayne and Manu looking into more open options, hopefully it'll get easier soon. ✪
Wayne Vaughn: If you want to get on the VCEDU calls, there is a link on Github... ✪
Kim Hamilton Duffy: Yes, each group tends to have a repo for meetings. ✪
Kim Hamilton Duffy: If you want a group, just submit an issue/PR. ✪
Christopher Allen: Some clarity - when is something ready for a Task Force -- don't suggest Chairs just immediately start a Task Force, someone proposes a work item, schedules meeting/time on their own, so many people involved, or regular discussions at higher level, do more than just one document, that's a good signal that this should escalate to a Task Force, more formally recognize their meetings. ✪
Christopher Allen: There is a third task force, joint one with DIF - on Secure Storage. ✪
Joe Andrieu: That's not a CCG task force, actually ✪
Christopher Allen: That's another example that can happen, interest, not solely in W3C communtiy, with other communities, we could do something like that for IETF oriented, OASIS oriented, work items don't start as Task Forces, they grow to become Task Forces. The first big success was Verifiable Claims Task Force (old name), the CCG was mostly inactive when VCTF was active. ✪
Christopher Allen: In the end, they were able to do what was necesasry to do move that item out... first big success was Verifiable Credentials as International Standard. ✪
Wayne Vaughn: Move through rest of work items to talk abot DID Resolution... get clarity over that issue. walking through items ✪
Wayne Vaughn: We have status method registry, linked data crpto registry, key format registry, ongoing community drafts... what are registries, lists of things that we maintain... tasteful selection of what goes into those lists. ✪
Wayne Vaughn: Next up community reports, major outputs, people that might consume from W3C, IETF -- hope that these will make it into right places... not official standards org, but can incubate them here... make sure they're successful. You can go through work items. ✪
Wayne Vaughn: VP Request - CHAPI - Credential Handler API - that came out of Silicon Valley Innovation Program... ✪
Wayne Vaughn: BBS+ 2020 work data formats for describing ZKPs w/ VCs. ✪
Wayne Vaughn: If we have a drivers license, you could selectively disclose fields w/o correlation in some cases. ✪
Wayne Vaughn: Some older items, what this grop has produced. Linked Data Signatures for JWS - VC Examples - DID Use Cases, which I find interesting... must relate to real world somehow. ✪
Wayne Vaughn: Commentary of process, kim gave an example, engagement models - work items. ✪
... this is a collection of all the DID methods that the others have registered
... this is the list current and known DID methods that people are or have worked on
... as a part of the DID WG work, there were another set of registries that we needed, the properties for a DID document, and parameters that you can attach to a DID
... things of that nature
... one of the things that became apparent was people wanted one place to find all the things about the DID ecosystem
... there was a suggestion the DID methods belonged in there
... the DID Spec REgistries in the DID WG is getting published, the First Public WD is going out, and the group felt it would be a good idea to combine everything in the first release so there's a full picture
... it created this issue where we don't know who is managing the list of DID methods
... the proposal is for the DID WG, a W3C WG, to take over management of that list while that group is active, and for us to archive the CCG version of that spec
... so that people don't open PRs in both places
... effectively this is just moving the work to the WG so the WG can build all the registries it needs to
... in the future, at the end of 2021 Sept, if the DID WG shuts down and if there isn't a maintenance group then the CCG would take back over
... but there was a request to officially move that over to the DID WG
Wayne Vaughn: There seems to be some uncertainty, what was the decision making process? ✪
Manu Sporny: We haven't made that decision yet, people kept saying they think it's a good idea and they should do it. The DID WG agreed theyw anted to take the work on ✪
... the second step was moving the content to a document in the DID WG and having an official publication
... the next step is for this group to say everything looks good, we'll transition it over
... we need to assert we're doing it, and call for any objections
... it shouldn't be a very controversial thing, but when we're transferring work between groups we should make sure we're doing it per the process
Joe Andrieu: There are issues in the DID WG that were assigned to Chris or me that need to be assigned to new chairs ✪
Ryan Grant: My question is doesn't moving something twice create indecision for future editors who are trying to find it? ✪
Manu Sporny: Short answer no, we can set up a redirect ✪
Jonathan Holt: Reservations about moving it to the DID WG, this is a decentralised method and it's not specific to W3C so I'd worry about what would happen to the DID methods, filtering or determining that theyr'e not conforming to the spec unilaterally in the WG ✪
... i see it as a decentralised solution and have reservations about it being DID WG specific
Kim Hamilton Duffy: Could you please takeover the closeout? my client just busted [scribe assist by Wayne Vaughn] ✪