The W3C Credentials Community Group

Meeting Transcriptions and Audio Recordings (2014-today)

Go Back

Verifiable Traceability Task Force

Transcript for 2022-09-27

Our Robot Overlords are scribing.
russell_hofvendahl_( is scribing.
<transcriber> Chris_Abernethy: Yes can you guys hear me okay.
Nis: vocab first
<transcriber> Chris_Abernethy: All right so this is in response to issue number 395 and that has to do with making sure that when you post an actual status options to the potential issue endpoint that if you do post that has an optional item you must include the type property and that is because you see API is got that in there it's very clearly required.
<transcriber> Chris_Abernethy: but we had it as an option.
<transcriber> Chris_Abernethy: Our schema and I think we all agreed this is the right thing to do last time we talked about it but my mood had asked if we could also do this for the update credential status endpoint and I went to do that this morning and realized that we had already done that quite some time ago with PR 366 so would like moved to re-review this before we merge but I think this is probably ready to go.
<transcriber> Chris_Abernethy: I did yeah I requested a review from him but it was just this morning so he probably doesn't have hasn't had time to look at it.
<transcriber> Russell_Hofvendahl_( Looks like the transcriber's picking up everyone but Nis
Chris: this in response to 395, making sure when you post status options to cred issue endpt, must include type property (if optional).
Sam Curren: I sure Sam could I work for in d.c. oh and have been involved in the did come efforts at the diff and it involved in the areas Community as well.
<transcriber> Chris_Abernethy: I was queuing to say exactly what you just said.
<transcriber> Chris_Abernethy: Yeah this is just for quote consistency to replace bubbles.
Nis: ok so 396, leaving that for another week. then 399 here, in doubt this is how we'll do it
Orie Steele: Except probably are we looking at for a seven.
Orie Steele: At one point requested changes we had talked about it I'm okay merging over top of if you've addressed the changes yep yeah.
Orie Steele: We're looking at 407?
<transcriber> Russell_Hofvendahl_( Do you want to kick the transcriber this is like the notes would be pretty confusing.
Orie Steele: Yes I think we ought to disable the transcriber and take normal scribe notes from now on.
Orie Steele: Tired of having it say things that I didn't say that are offensive that going man.
<transcriber> Russell_Hofvendahl_( Can you just get it like any other.
Nis: some checks failing on... will have to look on this and come back to fix
Nis: again, abt moving to multitenant platform support, some diff ways to do that
Orie Steele: +1 Chris
Chris: each part of conformance suite should only be testing one endpt
Nis: & way you suggest it, take hacky script, make proper method out of it, use it whenever we need it
Chris: suggest in root folder in conformance suite, add root function similar to how get token and caches, gets json caches
Orie Steele: Not sure if these PRs or change suggestions align with what will say
Chris: if we tell them to provide us w did web, save themn from implementation, not going thru extra step of providing did url is easier
Orie Steele: Yes, we should communicate reqs, reqs should be minimized
Chris: agree, but not sure relates to PR
Nis: not completely unrelated. if want to do generic could do any of this stuff here
Orie Steele: Pr 410 abt did web endpt
Chris: so yes, way this is implemented is one way, but disagree with how
Orie Steele: But primarily just exchange endpts not all in test?
Nis: also issuer id
Orie Steele: A given, but exchange endpts DO need to resolve in did web
Chris: think abt exchange endpt testing
Orie Steele: So your proposal, before running exchange endpt tests, make request cache results go to cache for that
Chris: but resolve did web talking about [something]?
Orie Steele: So to be clear, wouldn't be did resolution endpt, convert did web string to url, [...], access cache when needed
Chris: & there'd be entire separate suite
Nis: two things still need to discuss about issuer id
Chris: agree, that's a holdover
Orie Steele: Yes, legacy
Nis: so, limited to exchange endpt
Paul: authenticated did resolution, don't know, someone post a link?
Orie Steele: Every implementer stands up software implementation of spec desscribing http endpts
Paul: why that way? why need auth'd?
Orie Steele: Thinking abt software implementations as being exposed. tryna test that sorta implementation
Nis: so next steps, how we move fwd
Chris: would like new PR, leave this open will base on
Nis: talk about your suggestion, or belongs in other repo
Orie Steele: Surprised we didn't encounter before, but looks great thanks
Nis: so once you're done chris we'll close this as well
Chris: one of mine. we had convo in 351 and related issues, whether or not when post soln issue whether related should be created for proof
Nis: just approved
Orie Steele: (Abt 351) number one prob is if want to match exact signature, won't be able to do that, server will always assign new date
Chris: came up bc some question abt if not testing should [...]
Orie Steele: Yeah on test site should be valuable test, set it if defaulted correctly
Chris: don't care if we incl or not, I want to know how test this
Orie Steele: If user doesn't supply created date then set by server
Chris: decline, 351 indicate not going to remove it, going to need to modify 352 which expects to see it
Orie Steele: Nasty edge case, same applies to [...], set created as caller, ask for jwt, expect iat value in jwt
Nis: ok let's push fwd, 412, also chris
Chris: for adding some positive testing
Orie Steele: Not specific to pr but
Orie Steele: Chose did key bc easy, chose [y] bc easy
Chris: don't have specific knowledge, but general, going with known implementation you don't like, in project, early, bad idea
Orie Steele: Think did jwk is better, supports [?] curves
Nis: I'm good with this one, then
Orie Steele: Will file issue
Nis: merging this one
Chris: followup on change made earlier to remove "code" prop from errors
Nis: objections?
Nis: merging then
Chris: purpose, introduce two new specific error responses to use when request boyd not up to signature, second [...]
Nis: so not adding code just description
Chris: still 400, just diff message
Nis: one approval. anyone else?
Orie Steele: Looking at now, looks good to me
Orie Steele: Wait, invalid sig in request body, not 400, client not wrong for asking to verify sig that's malformed
Chris: ok, will add note then let's move on
Nis: next 419, another chris, last for today
Chris: a couple errors in openapi spec, fixed
Chris: conflict so will fix, happy to merge it offline
Nis: will give note to merge
Orie Steele: So are folks expecting be able to load spec, integrate, target reome server, [?] to remove server, request with authorization
Orie Steele: If api spec doesn't work for that haven't built valid api spec
Chris: in favor, new issue
Orie Steele: Should work, nis, but assigning you to create that issue
Orie Steele: This works afaik for our endpts, if not working for this item we should help