<orie> I do like being able to not attend meetings.
<mprorock> In IRC type “q+” to add yourself to the queue, with an optional
Sandy_Aggarwal: Hey hi this is Sandy here can you hear me okay. ✪
Sandy_Aggarwal: Hi good morning and happy New Year to everybody so this is Sandy Agarwal I'm actually a very new member to this specific community group I believe I have my familiarity skid off so I will double check on that but so should be able to contribute basically I've been active in the hyper Ledger and toip circles but it’s the first time I'm actually trying to contribute and hoping to contribute directly in a different fee if we see Circle here. ✪
Sandy_Aggarwal: Mostly of course from the VC and identity upon fee so today in here just to drink in and then see exactly how these meetings are run but thank you very much for having me over here. ✪
<kaliya_identitywoman> my e-mail if you want to ask questions about either firstname.lastname@example.org
<manu_sporny> VC API is NOT happening... we'll start next week.
<joe_andrieu> Apparently not
<joe_andrieu> I'd like to get a response to the comment I just added to the issue, before moving forward
<joe_andrieu> There is a specific linkedResource property defined in did:cosmos.
Paul_Dietrich_GS1: Yeah I hope you can hear me Mike I just want to hear from maybe orie someone else for kind of folks new to this issue like to compare and contrast to just putting those resources as service end points. ✪
<joe_andrieu> not without citing at least DWN and cosmos approaches as input
<manu_sporny> Ok, good, I was worried that we were going to count a -1 as a "can't start the work" -- so +1 to what Joe is saying.
<manu_sporny> Ah, well, that's new information that I didn't know about ... the "hostile position" portion of it.
TallTed_//_Ted_Thibodeau_(he/him)_(OpenLinkSw.com): Yeah uh Joe I think you're taking this too personally. ✪
TallTed_//_Ted_Thibodeau_(he/him)_(OpenLinkSw.com): I understand the emotional component of doing some work and feeling like it's being overlooked or discounted or acted against but that's not part of this particular activity the creation of a work item is inherently open to whatever else is out there. ✪
<orie> Wait till we learn that JSON Web Tokens are Verifiable Credentials.
TallTed_//_Ted_Thibodeau_(he/him)_(OpenLinkSw.com): There will be a charter for the work item the way that the ccg is chartered that's the way work items are done also they’re a sub function of the ccg they get chartered that's the place to raise any objections that you may have which would be if anywhere the place that something might be blessed before the work is done but that's not the way that anybody that I'm hearing or have interacted with within the CCG approaches such things. ✪
TallTed_//_Ted_Thibodeau_(he/him)_(OpenLinkSw.com): We try and take into account existing work. ✪
TallTed_//_Ted_Thibodeau_(he/him)_(OpenLinkSw.com): By anybody inside or outside the group and we try to make ourselves aware of other work that we may not yet have been aware of. ✪
TallTed_//_Ted_Thibodeau_(he/him)_(OpenLinkSw.com): So yes it may be that somebody wrote this clumsily and slanted the initial proposal of the charter for this work item towards their own work but that ain't the end of it so bluntly please take a breath and I think you'll be fine in the end that's it. ✪
PROPOSAL: Adopt "DID-Linked Resources Specification" as a work item
<manu_sporny> +0.85 (with a caveat that Joe's concerns are addressed in due time)
<orie> Remind me to vote 0 more often.
<harrison_tang> I think Orie should continue to make a stance on everything :)
<manu_sporny> I like how voting is now being interpreted as (fanatical support +1, complete ambivalence 0, or burn in hell disagreement -1) :P
<orie> I wonder if DID Core v2 will even have "documents"...
<manu_sporny> DID Core v2 will have "metaverses"
<manu_sporny> /me :P
<andrew_whitehead> Maybe just document identifiers, with resolution left to the reader
Harrison_Tang: But by the way Mike there's a question in the queue. ✪
<sandy_aggarwal> Manu - I'd love to add some comments on this
<sandy_aggarwal> I'm looking into identity and VCs from a gaming perspective and I'll like to add some questions in that regard.
PROPOSAL: adopt work item "Verifiable Issuers and Verifiers"
<manu_sporny> Also, please don't ship this into production any time soon. :P
<dmitri_zagidulin> @Manu - you ask a /lot/ of us :)
Sandy_Aggarwal: Hey Manu and I apologize for speaking out of here I'll probably just get in touch with you maybe offline but I just need to understand the format a little bit more but I'm also looking at this from a toip and the hyperLedger perspective one of the sub groups someone get hyper Ledger is moving to and sections of blockchain gaming of course metaverse is such a bad term to use but I'm looking at this. ✪
Sandy_Aggarwal: like specially When you mention that can you trust. ✪
Sandy_Aggarwal: The the verify of the issuer I'm also looking the concept of temporary verifiers or temporary issues so I'll probably speak to you offline and then try to understand the scope of your work a little more. ✪
TallTed_//_Ted_Thibodeau_(he/him)_(OpenLinkSw.com): Yeah sort of point of order thing the agenda for today was a very hand wavy work items and activities that does not point me to any issues or PRs or anything else it's obviously not fixable for today but for future given that we have such things and that they have been open for a bit and I haven't been commented on them but don't remember that now. ✪
TallTed_//_Ted_Thibodeau_(he/him)_(OpenLinkSw.com): listing those out is. ✪
TallTed_//_Ted_Thibodeau_(he/him)_(OpenLinkSw.com): Probably worthwhile Joe I would also encourage you to raise your clear objections on that issue. ✪
TallTed_//_Ted_Thibodeau_(he/him)_(OpenLinkSw.com): So that others actually know what's going on there because the comments that you've made there do not appear to me to carry the weight of the objections you made in this call thanks. ✪
TallTed_//_Ted_Thibodeau_(he/him)_(OpenLinkSw.com): Not specifically to this one it's a little more broad it's a suggestion to enable the wiki functionality on relevant Repos such that things like the charters that are being developed for these work items actually be addressed in a place that we can all contribute to and which is obviously visible and tracked more than something like a Google doc which I think is where they are right now. ✪
PROPOSAL: The CCG approves final report status for "StatusList2021" and supports adoption of the work as an input document for the VC WG
TallTed_//_Ted_Thibodeau_(he/him)_(OpenLinkSw.com): I'm going to jump in because I don't think anything I’ll probably say is going to change anybody's vote related to what you were just saying Manu and related to the work items that we have talked about today and all the other stuff that's in the in The Ether right now it may be worth developing and I'm sorry I don't think I have the chops for this something of a dependency diagram and a process flow so that the things which are all going to be. ✪
TallTed_//_Ted_Thibodeau_(he/him)_(OpenLinkSw.com): competing for our time are not so much competing. ✪
TallTed_//_Ted_Thibodeau_(he/him)_(OpenLinkSw.com): With each other for functionality in the end and so we don't come into a meeting in a few weeks or months and say oh yeah we have these two work items that have come up with specs that are completely in opposition to each other. ✪
TallTed_//_Ted_Thibodeau_(he/him)_(OpenLinkSw.com): Yeah I don't know how. ✪
TallTed_//_Ted_Thibodeau_(he/him)_(OpenLinkSw.com): Possible it is but I think it's worth thinking about. ✪