The W3C Credentials Community Group

Meeting Transcriptions and Audio Recordings (2014-today)

Go Back

Verifiable Traceability Task Force

Transcript for 2024-01-09

Our Robot Overlords are scribing.
Mahmoud Alkhraishi: My Edinburgh there you go welcome to the first race call of the Year let me turn off the Scribe.
Mahmoud Alkhraishi: Welcome to the first trace call of the year [scribe assist by Nis Jespersen ]
Mahmoud Alkhraishi: After normal procedures, we will go through all issues in prep for cutting v1 [scribe assist by Nis Jespersen ]
<nis> Both specs, by end of the month
<nis> scripe+
Nis Jespersen is scribing.
Two approvals, merging
Next, udpated nomination
More agnostic to both gas and oil pipelines
Next: purge EIP
Nis Jespersen : This was based on BTI report, but not used
Nis Jespersen : These workflows predate our workflow data model, removing them
Nis Jespersen : Long time coming, several iterations with GS1, should be good to merge now.
Mahmoud Alkhraishi: We don't use VC JWT, seems good to remove
Mahmoud Alkhraishi: Should only matter if your processor it case specific
Chris Abernethy: Let's see if we start failing
Mahmoud Alkhraishi: Interop has 21 issue, vocab 60
Let's go through them from the top
Tag the ones required for v1.
Chris Abernethy: Is that the same as the VC2 tagging?
Chris Abernethy: Assign to me, I will see why we're doing this
Mahmoud Alkhraishi: Might not be a v1 issue
Mahmoud Alkhraishi: For the record, any objections to moving the meeting time back to the original time?
(No objections)
Chris Abernethy: The jsonld looks right to me
Mahmoud Alkhraishi: If the service does not have a context, that needs fixing
Chris Abernethy: It should be in the DID context
"Service" needs to be defined
Mahmoud Alkhraishi: There's missing context on some terms. This seems like a vocab issue
Mahmoud Alkhraishi: Are we going to do this for v1?
Chris Abernethy: I can take a stab
Label is v1.0
<tallted> started at top of hour? calendar still shows start at half-past...
Mahmoud Alkhraishi: Remove DID Auth
Mahmoud Alkhraishi: Not possible to move the schedule.
Our Robot Overlords are scribing.
Nis Jespersen is scribing.
Next week we WILL start at this time, half past the hour
Ambition: to cut a v1
Nis Jespersen : 602 Is DID Auth, we can close
Mahmoud Alkhraishi: 604 Has the resolution
Patrick St-Louis: The VC API workflows are used to start an exchange
Path based on the kind of workflow
Pretty different from the presentation exchange on trace interop
VC API is for shorter exchanges
Mahmoud Alkhraishi: These are two fundamentally different concepts
Nis Jespersen : When Manu joined a month ago it sounded like we were much more aligned
Mahmoud Alkhraishi: Could be VC API can also be used long term
Our workflows are month-long
Patrick St-Louis: Across multiple presentation?
Mahmoud Alkhraishi: Yes
Nis Jespersen : To connect multiple presentations
Mahmoud Alkhraishi: Used by the holder
On the VC playground, when you have an issuer with OIDC, you get a workflow exchange id
You get an exchange for the workflow
^ Patrick
Mahmoud Alkhraishi: Patrick, please bring this up on the VC API group
About their understanding
Mahmoud Alkhraishi: This is nice to have
Nis Jespersen : Chris: +1
Nis Jespersen : Nis +1
Chris Abernethy: We closed PR 606 because it was a negative test
Nis Jespersen : This should be done
Mahmoud Alkhraishi: Closing
Mahmoud Alkhraishi: We have oauth mentioned several places
We don't need more
Nis Jespersen : Nis +1
Mahmoud Alkhraishi: We need normative section on who initiates the interaction
Chris Abernethy: The paragraph in the intro seems to be describing DIDAuth
Patrick St-Louis: Back to workflows, who uses workflow ids?
Mahmoud Alkhraishi: Both holders and verifiers
Mahmoud Alkhraishi: Removing the paragraph is in 572. Closing
Patrick St-Louis: Who would be the party creating the workflow id?
Nis Jespersen : Always the holder
When you make a presentation, you are a holder
Chris Abernethy: A few have been done
Mahmoud Alkhraishi: I will review
Mahmoud Alkhraishi: Important for v1
Mahmoud Alkhraishi: We removed the workflows today
Nis Jespersen : Confirmed, we merged that today
Mahmoud Alkhraishi: Do we still want to make this sectino on relation to VC API?
Patrick St-Louis: It's just the credentials issue and verify you are using
Mahmoud Alkhraishi: Yes, that relation
Patrick St-Louis: The options when issuing. In trace you do make use of the options, VC API has preconfigurations
Mahmoud Alkhraishi: That is a good comment
Mahmoud Alkhraishi: Do we still need the section?
Patrick St-Louis: Just say this was inspired by VC API
Makes sense since VC API is also used in other test suites
Mahmoud Alkhraishi: Can we stick around for the last 7 issues
Mahmoud Alkhraishi: Abstract update. Straight forward
Nis Jespersen : We are not making a dependency between VC2.2 for Trace v1
Mahmoud Alkhraishi: No
Mahmoud Alkhraishi: We should make cryptography list
Pinging Orie
Chris Abernethy: VC2.0 was supposed to halt the issue discussion until upgrade
Mahmoud Alkhraishi: Yes, but considering from a Trace v1 perspective
Chris Abernethy: Will review
Mahmoud Alkhraishi: Revoc2020 is deprecated, do we want to switch references to SL 2021?
Patrick St-Louis: Sounds like it could go. The flow is the same
I just implemented both, 2021 only would streamline things
Chris Abernethy: JWT request body
Nis Jespersen : We just removed the VC JWT collection
Mahmoud Alkhraishi: This is JOSE/COSE
Mahmoud Alkhraishi: I want to say no to supporting SD_JWT on Trace v1
Nis Jespersen : Nis +1
Too ambitious
Patrick St-Louis: How do I test that revocation actually work?
Patrick St-Louis: Only negative testing
Mahmoud Alkhraishi: Please review Vocab issues before next week
So we can go through the 60 issues quickly
Mahmoud Alkhraishi: Next week reverting to the original time