<ildiko_mazar> Good morning, good afternoon everyone, welcome to today's W3C Verifiable Credentials for Education task force call, on Monday, January the 13th. Let's get started with the housekeeping items. IP Note: Anyone can participate in these calls. However, all substantive contributions to any Credentials Community Group Work Items must originate from members of the CCG with full IPR agreements signed. You can find the link to this in the meeting invites. You'll need to have a W3C account, that is also something easy to do online. Moving on to call notes. Please note that these meetings are recorded. We have a robot transcriber and we also make audio and video recordings, that are archived and available online. If you want to speak, please raise your hand, or add yourself to the queue by typing “q+” in the chat. And please be brief if you have a question to ask, we want to maximise the time for conversations. Thank you. Now to Introductions & Reintroductions. If we have any new people in the call, or somebody would like to reintroduce themselves, please feel free to take the floor. If nobody wants to take the floor, we can move on to announcements and reminders. Anyone has events or things that happened that people should be aware of, again, please queue yourself up and share the news with us.
<kate_giovacchini,_tln> Open Badges v2.0 is not, in my opinion, an LER aligned standard. But I do think 'Credential Management' is a decent bucket for the functional story that needs to be told.
<sharon_leu> Were we going to have a Verifiable Credentials 101 as part of this conversation? I hear a lot of terms being conflated in this presentation.
<dmitri_zagidulin> @sharon - we couuuuld. if we have time
<kerri_lemoie> I think it could be helpful to differentiate Credential Management that issue VC-aligned credentials and those that don't.
<kate_giovacchini,_tln> :+1:
<kerri_lemoie> It was me
<naomi> As I'm looking at these examples, the categories are not mutually exclusive... might be better to present each wallet/provider and then have a few columns where they can identify under the different categories... some may be self-soverign and white label. They might be platforms and offer a wallet.
<ildiko_mazar> @Ian, if you could also share the link to your slides in the chat, it would be greatly appreciated
<kerri_lemoie> Also in reference to privacy - VC/OBv3 provides a method for credentials to be shared privately but 2.0 don't and that is a very big distinction.
<kerri_lemoie> Please don't link to that graphic. It will be in the LER Accelerator report coming out this month. You can link to that once it is published. The doc I provided was just to explain the continuum in this call. It will be deleted.
<kate_giovacchini,_tln> Excuse me a moment.
<ian_davidson> Sounds good - won't link to it
<sharon_leu> Wait, don't we have a general definition of wallets in this ecosystem?
<naomi> Love that idea!
<colin_reynolds,_ed_design_lab> I'd say it's pretty big industry considering what Instructure has done and is aiming to do over the next year or so...
<kerri_lemoie> I don't think we need to reinvent definitions here - just help educate how VCs work and their value.
<ian_davidson> I don't know the answer to this - but will the Apple Wallet or Google Wallet match the definition of the wallet this group would define? If not, I would suggest that the VC group might want to define a specific type of wallet.
<dmitri_zagidulin> @sharon it's more like - we may not have _consensus_ on which requirements are valid or not
<dmitri_zagidulin> @Kaliya - and that slide deck would be an excellent input document, should we ever want to define wallet, as a Task Force or as a community
<dmitri_zagidulin> cause it's a great slide deck, and also gets into the other item of confusion (of wallet vs agent)
<kerri_lemoie> Agreed - Susan. Technically there are nuances but the value of VCs - like privacy preserving (ie not going back to issuers for verificcation) is a huge differentiator.
<kaliya_identity_woman> What is a Wallet? is the titel of that document
<kerri_lemoie> It's confusing to the ecosystem because there are apps named "wallet" in edu that aren't VC wallets but they are transitioning. Issuing platforms where credentials are stored and shared from aren't wallets.
<ildiko_mazar> NB, Simone already shared a draft on the mailing list
<colin_reynolds,_ed_design_lab> I'd be happy to work on a VC-101 doc + blog post with others
<dmitri_zagidulin> @Colin - thank you! very helpful.
<rob_coyle_(1edtech)> I'm in full support of trying to gain consensus and educate, but I think we need to be mindful that it will be hard to sway any provider to change the name of the functionality they want to use for their customers. If wallet makes sense to the learners that's what they will use, even if it isn't a pure wallet by our definition.
<dmitri_zagidulin> @Rob - yes! also very good point.
<kerri_lemoie> If we think that's true @rob - how do we differentiate the functionality?
<susan_stroud> I'm experiencing this confusion spilling out onto potential investors.
<ildiko_mazar> Thanks, @Sharon
<rob_coyle_(1edtech)> @kerri - I wish I knew!
<phillip_long> focusing on the differentiators between the self-sovereign wallet designed for decentralized architectures might be very helpful
<phillip_long> that is these self-sovereign wallets and other types of "wallets"
<ian_davidson> Thank you for the invitation to present!