<justin_richer> mocks are 100% required for proper testing
<justin_richer> anybody who says otherwise is kidding themselves
<orie> I agree, but the way the tests are written today, they are "not mockable"
<orie> I would be fine with Justin's proposal FWIIW
<orie> I hope folks realize the developer cost for it, but its doable.
<manu> It is a higher developer cost for the first item vs. the second one
<manu> and it'll ultimately come down to people doing the work... both are doable.
<tallted_//_ted_thibodeau_(he/him)_(openlinksw.com)> PSEUDO PROPOSAL: Refactor the test suite to isolate DID resolution in such a way that it can be mocked, and make did;key the only DID format that must be supported to run the test suite
PROPOSAL: Refactor the test suite to isolate DID resolution in such a way that it can be mocked, and make did;key the only DID format that must be supported to run the test suite.
<manu> +0.7 I think the other one is more straight forward to start with
PROPOSAL: Refactor the test suite to support did;key as the only mandatory DID format for the test suite.
<manu> Ok, we have 9 minutes left in the call, do we want to keep going on this issue, or switch over to Authorization?
<mprorock> auth please
<bumblefudge> mutli-proposal showdown plz
Topic: Authorization Proposals
PROPOSAL: The W3C CCG VC-HTTPI-API TF and IETF-GNAP-WG agree to joint IPR protected development of the GNAP specification.
<justin_richer> -1, pretty sure that's not legal per IETF policies
<justin_richer> (you can all join GNAP WG in IETF, it's free...)
PROPOSAL: The W3C CCG VC-HTTPI-API DRAFT normatively recommends using IETF-GNAP-DRAFT.
<justin_richer> (depends on "normatively recommend")
<manu> -1, but I do want to say something good non-normatively about GNAP
<bumblefudge> ^ yes
<bumblefudge> non-normative bring it on
PROPOSAL: The W3C CCG VC-HTTPI-API DRAFT does not mention IETF-GNAP-DRAFT.
<manu> -0.5 -- I'd like to mention it in the spec.
<bumblefudge> not even non-normatively?
<bumblefudge> 0 because i like free reign in the non-normative sections :D
PROPOSAL: The W3C CCG VC-HTTPI-API DRAFT informally suggests not using IETF-GNAP-DRAFT.
<mprorock> given current state
PROPOSAL: The W3C CCG VC-HTTPI-API DRAFT normatively forbids using IETF-GNAP-DRAFT.
<justin_richer> Orie, forbid, really?
<mprorock> highly nuanced topic
<orie> Thanks for the clarity Justin, that's helpful.
<bumblefudge> some of my best friends are unstable community drafts
<justin_richer> saying "it's just a draft" is not the whole story and misses a lot of what's there. The core is basically stable today, according to the editors and chairs.