IRC log of wpay on 2015-11-16

Timestamps are in UTC.

15:01:00 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #wpay
15:01:01 [RRSAgent]
logging to http://www.w3.org/2015/11/16-wpay-irc
15:01:04 [Zakim]
Zakim has joined #wpay
15:01:12 [manu]
rrsagent, make logs member
15:01:35 [manu]
Meeting: Web Payments IG Meeting
15:01:45 [dbaron]
dbaron has joined #wpay
15:03:12 [ShaneM]
Present+ ShaneM
15:03:13 [burdges]
burdges has joined #wpay
15:03:18 [burdges]
hello
15:03:57 [burdges]
present+burdges
15:04:37 [manu]
Present+ Manu
15:04:41 [manu]
Present+ ShaneM
15:07:13 [burdges]
Hello
15:07:33 [burdges]
Yes, I'm Jeff Burdges <jeffrey.burdges@inria.fr>
15:08:01 [burdges]
only just getting up to speed with the group
15:10:09 [collier-matthew]
Present+ MattC
15:10:36 [manu]
rrsagent, make minutes
15:10:36 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/11/16-wpay-minutes.html manu
15:10:53 [manu]
Meeting: Web Payments IG (not official telecon)
15:10:53 [dezell]
Meeting: Web Payments IG non-telcon
15:11:54 [manu]
Topic: Introduction to Jeff Burdges
15:12:09 [manu]
scribe: manu
15:13:07 [manu]
Jeff: Hi Jef Burdges, working with a startup payment processor, RSA blind signatures. It's a standard Chaumian based blind signing - crypto folks like. My background, mathematician but doing software. Startup incubator type thing.
15:13:34 [manu]
Manu: What are you hoping to get out of the group?
15:14:14 [manu]
Jeff: Debian developer said we should get involved with this work. His opinion, he didn't want the work we're doing to be kept out of web standards. I was the person volunteered to get involved from our group. In practice, not too different from concerns of folks from Ripple, etc.
15:14:39 [manu]
Jeff: interested in making sure standard is amenable to Chaumian blind signatures.
15:14:54 [manu]
Jeff: For blind signatures, it's the coin that you're paying with - low risk.
15:16:47 [manu]
Manu: Hey, Manu - very involved in payments and credentials at W3C.
15:17:08 [manu]
ShaneM: I've been involved w/ W3C on a variety of standards - following Web Payments for a few years as well as Credentials. I'm here to get Credential stuff rolling.
15:17:21 [manu]
DavidE: I'm co-chair of Web Payments WG - I keep the wheels on the wagon.
15:17:39 [manu]
Topic: Status of Credentials Task Force
15:17:57 [manu]
Manu: So, here's the current status
15:18:52 [manu]
Manu: We decided to do something around Credentials at W3C at WPIG face-to-face meeting in Sapporo.
15:18:55 [manu]
Manu: @@@
15:19:25 [manu]
DavidE: I think there is concern that we're being too secretive, but W3C staff is trying to make sure this is done correctly.
15:19:55 [manu]
DavidE: This has been a little difficult, I think we're ok delaying a week - we've got input from Jeff Jaffe that he believes we should move forward on this.
15:21:55 [ShaneM]
q+ to ask why the staff has any say in this at all?
15:22:13 [manu]
Manu: So, the problem is @@@@
15:22:41 [manu]
DavidE: I think next week might go a few ways - since we don't know all of the players, this is a hypothesising exercise. You have to make a best guess about where the issue is.
15:23:23 [manu]
DavidE: I have though for a while that if you were to take the architecture for a general purpose credential, which is what the CG wants, and you were to figure out the components of that thing to move payments forward, and build a charter around that, it would not preclude the expansion of that energy to other work items.
15:24:08 [manu]
DavidE: People could figure out if they want to move forward based on a limited charter.
15:24:12 [manu]
ack ShaneM
15:24:12 [Zakim]
ShaneM, you wanted to ask why the staff has any say in this at all?
15:24:58 [dezell]
q+
15:25:07 [manu]
ShaneM: If the IG has agreed to have the discussion, then have the discussion, W3C staff doesn't get a vote - they're a facilitator. If other people want to have a voice, they should come in. I don't understand how this kind of struggle resolved in any way other than in favor of the members.
15:25:36 [manu]
DavidE: If this were just a struggle between us and our staff contact, it would be relatively simple, but there are others that are commenting on what's going on.
15:25:47 [manu]
DavidE: I think the IG can make progress next week.
15:26:18 [manu]
DavidE: This kind of exchange is unusual, but not unprecedented.
15:26:42 [collier-matthew]
manu: I want to make sure we have a firm resolution next monday on which way to proceed. We have 3 options in front of us
15:26:50 [collier-matthew]
1. do the work in the credential CG
15:27:13 [collier-matthew]
2. create a new community group, but the CG doesn't like that option.
15:27:21 [dezell]
s/staff contact/staff contact (which it clearly is not from what I can see)/
15:27:36 [collier-matthew]
3. Webpayments IG creates a task force
15:28:23 [collier-matthew]
There should be a proposal to an agreement on one of these options.
15:29:24 [dezell]
q?
15:30:04 [collier-matthew]
manu: I don't think that W3C staff has the bandwidth to analyse this. My fear is that they are not prepared to make a decision on Monday.
15:31:35 [manu]
q+ to note proposal to invite existing stakeholders to the conversation.
15:34:13 [dezell]
ack dezell
15:35:35 [manu]
DavidE: You need a lot of bandwidth to deal with this issue, it's on agenda for monday. It might behoove us to have a goal of where to have discussion.
15:35:50 [manu]
DavidE:Delaying minutes may not be an issue
15:36:36 [manu]
DavidE: I want to make sure our discussion on Monday is straightforward - people that dial in to discussion. We need to make special dispensation - email discussion / public minutes - discussion - teleconference.
15:38:33 [manu]
Manu: I think we need to make these calls open.
15:38:57 [manu]
DavidE: This is the type of issue I'm concerned about - there is an economic issue - members participate, etc. I don't think we can completely get away from that.
15:39:56 [manu]
DavidE: I think we can bring it up. Maybe phase I and Phase II approach might work.
15:40:50 [manu]
https://www.w3.org/Payments/IG/wiki/Main_Page/ProposalsQ42015/VerifiableClaimsTaskForce
15:42:20 [collier-matthew]
manu: There is no reason to exclude anyone from a discussion about how we're going to do the work.
15:42:27 [collier-matthew]
It was proposed we do this in a CG.
15:42:31 [collier-matthew]
Anyone can join a CG
15:43:08 [collier-matthew]
... These are just open meetings. We will take minutes and recording minutes.
15:43:37 [collier-matthew]
... making it a member only discussion has been rejectd.
15:43:54 [collier-matthew]
... Input to date has been to create an open forum.
15:44:20 [collier-matthew]
... Setting up a new community group takes some effort.
15:45:13 [manu]
DavidE: So two options - Have iG run the work, create a new CG
15:45:27 [manu]
DavidE: Have a call on Tuesday a 11am - anyone from anywhere can join that call.
15:45:44 [collier-matthew]
manu: Yes, no need to create a CG or anything, just set a a time to meet.
15:45:51 [manu]
Manu: Yes, let's just set a time and meet - no IPR necessary.
15:46:06 [ShaneM]
q+ to ask if the wicg could be a backup location to have the discussion
15:46:11 [manu]
DavidE: I don't see a way to change IPR rules - third rail. I need to go back and read IG IPR again
15:46:13 [manu]
q- manu
15:46:29 [manu]
DavidE: If we find something that creates friction w/ IPR - then we have an issue.
15:46:40 [manu]
DavidE: We don't want to get all the lawyers involved around IPR issues.
15:46:43 [manu]
ack ShaneM
15:46:43 [Zakim]
ShaneM, you wanted to ask if the wicg could be a backup location to have the discussion
15:47:27 [manu]
ShaneM: I understand and agree - if there are IPR issues to waive - if we can't do this in Credentials CG - what about WICG.
15:47:37 [collier-matthew]
manu: the WICG is browser tech.
15:47:48 [collier-matthew]
... this is not a browser tech discussion.
15:48:13 [collier-matthew]
... the other issue is the overhead involved in joining the group etc.
15:48:25 [collier-matthew]
... the IPR thing is a farce which does not come into play.
15:48:46 [collier-matthew]
... This group we're talking about is not going to generate any documents that require sign-off.
15:48:52 [collier-matthew]
It might create use cases.
15:49:25 [collier-matthew]
... We can have people join the Credentials CG as required to address IPR concerns.
15:49:52 [collier-matthew]
... The objection to reusing the credential CG is that it's not a neutral space.
15:50:10 [dezell]
q?
15:50:18 [collier-matthew]
... Anyone who asserts that it is not a neutral space should express their concerns.
15:51:05 [manu]
DavidE: What would be the ideal way we go about this?
15:51:21 [collier-matthew]
manu: I think the ideal is to resuse the credential CG.
15:51:54 [chaals]
chaals has joined #wpay
15:52:10 [collier-matthew]
... we need to convince people who feel the group is non-neutral is willing to setup meetings focused on listening to those who feel the group is not a neutral space.
15:52:27 [collier-matthew]
... Use the credential CG and an IPR agreement.
15:52:28 [AdrianHB]
AdrianHB has joined #wpay
15:53:07 [manu]
DavidE: What about logistics of writing the charter?
15:53:13 [manu]
Manu: The IG can do that work.
15:53:38 [manu]
DavidE: Trying to figure out how this applies to Interledger - continue to have discussion out there - Task Force in IG that puts together charter.
15:54:11 [collier-matthew]
manu: I think they are in the same position that the credentials work is in, but they are atleast 1 year away from creating a charter.
15:54:59 [collier-matthew]
... the flow from community group to a working group is not well mapped.
15:57:01 [collier-matthew]
... the CG's start out as being neutral, they come to consensus about what should happen, then they are disregarded and a new group is formed.
15:57:24 [ShaneM]
q+ to mention that I assume there is no way to have a joint task force between a CG and an IG
15:57:32 [collier-matthew]
It sets the community groups up for failure.
15:58:35 [manu]
DavidE: I think this is an AC problem. I think you are chairing two large CGs that have come up with something and you're frustrated by the transition process.
15:59:16 [manu]
DavidE: I want to make sure we come away with a way forward on Monday. We have two choices - we lead the CG and charge, but formulate a task force in IG to begin work on charter, which will take input from CG.
16:00:13 [manu]
DavidE: Other possibilities, we create a new Task force and have calls where we can invite other people in. I think both are reasonable. We don't need to kill ourselves over the discussion.
16:00:33 [manu]
DavidE: Let me try to socialize this.
16:01:51 [ShaneM]
ack ShaneM
16:01:51 [Zakim]
ShaneM, you wanted to mention that I assume there is no way to have a joint task force between a CG and an IG
16:02:42 [manu]
rrsagent, draft minutes
16:02:42 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/11/16-wpay-minutes.html manu
16:02:54 [manu]
rrsagent, make minutes public
16:02:54 [RRSAgent]
I'm logging. I don't understand 'make minutes public', manu. Try /msg RRSAgent help
16:02:59 [manu]
rrsagent, draft minutes
16:02:59 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/11/16-wpay-minutes.html manu
16:03:22 [manu]
rrsagent, set log public
16:03:27 [manu]
rrsagent, draft minutes
16:03:27 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/11/16-wpay-minutes.html manu
16:03:35 [dezell]
chair: N/A
16:03:42 [manu]
rrsagent, draft minutes
16:03:42 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/11/16-wpay-minutes.html manu
16:04:23 [dezell]
s/we lead the CG/we leave the CG/
16:04:30 [dezell]
rrsagent, make minutes
16:04:30 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/11/16-wpay-minutes.html dezell
16:05:42 [dezell]
s/CG and charge/CG in charge/
16:05:48 [dezell]
rrsagent, make minutes
16:05:48 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/11/16-wpay-minutes.html dezell
16:06:21 [dezell]
zakim, bye
16:06:22 [Zakim]
leaving. As of this point the attendees have been ShaneM, burdges, Manu, MattC
16:06:22 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #wpay
16:06:25 [dezell]
rrsagent, bye
16:06:25 [RRSAgent]
I see no action items
16:11:10 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #wpay
16:11:10 [RRSAgent]
logging to http://www.w3.org/2015/11/16-wpay-irc
16:11:23 [manu]
rrsagent, make logs public
16:11:27 [manu]
rrsagent, make minutes
16:11:27 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/11/16-wpay-minutes.html manu
16:11:48 [manu]
s/Web Payments IG Meeting/Web Payments IG Meeting (unofficial teleconference)/
16:11:55 [manu]
Present+ davidEzell
16:12:05 [manu]
s/hello//
16:12:08 [manu]
s/Hello//
16:12:18 [manu]
s/inria.fr/inria/
16:12:28 [manu]
s/only just getting up to speed with the group//
16:13:12 [manu]
s/@@@/We have three proposals on the table 1) Create a new CG to have the discussion, 2) Create a task force in the IG to have the discussion, 3) Re-use the Credentials CG and have the discussion there.
16:14:13 [manu]
s/@@@@/1) There is strong push back against creating a new CG that effectively does the same thing as the Credentials CG, 2) IPR issues w/ the IG, and 3) The 'non-neutral' assertion around the Credentials CG.
16:14:25 [manu]
s/@@@@/1) There is strong push back against creating a new CG that effectively does the same thing as the Credentials CG, 2) IPR issues w\/ the IG, and 3) The 'non-neutral' assertion around the Credentials CG./
16:14:30 [manu]
rrsagent, make minutes
16:14:30 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/11/16-wpay-minutes.html manu
16:15:25 [manu]
s/@@@/We have three proposals on the table 1) Create a new CG to have the discussion, 2) Create a task force in the IG to have the discussion, 3) Re-use the Credentials CG and have the discussion there.
16:15:52 [manu]
s/@We have three proposals on the table 1) Create a new CG to have the discussion, 2) Create a task force in the IG to have the discussion, 3) Re-use the Credentials CG and have the discussion there.//1) There is strong push back against creating a new CG that effectively does the same thing as the Credentials CG, 2) IPR issues w\/ the IG, and 3) The 'non-neutral' assertion around the Credentials CG./
16:15:54 [manu]
rrsagent, make minutes
16:15:54 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/11/16-wpay-minutes.html manu
16:17:08 [manu]
i/I think there is concern/We have three proposals on the table 1) Create a new CG to have the discussion, 2) Create a task force in the IG to have the discussion, 3) Re-use the Credentials CG and have the discussion there./
16:17:09 [manu]
rrsagent, make minutes
16:17:09 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/11/16-wpay-minutes.html manu
16:18:10 [manu]
i/I think next week might/So, the problem is 1) There is strong push back against creating a new CG that effectively does the same thing as the Credentials CG, 2) IPR issues w\/ the IG, and 3) The 'non-neutral' assertion around the Credentials CG./
16:18:24 [manu]
s/So, the problem is @We/We/
16:18:28 [manu]
rrsagent, make minutes
16:18:28 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/11/16-wpay-minutes.html manu
17:29:27 [chaals]
chaals has joined #wpay
18:16:27 [dbaron]
dbaron has joined #wpay
19:22:21 [shepazu_]
shepazu_ has joined #wpay
20:30:08 [DJackson]
DJackson has joined #wpay