09:43:06 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #blockchain
09:43:06 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2016/09/20-blockchain-irc
09:43:16 <shepazu> Agenda: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-blockchain/2016Sep/0084.html
09:44:04 <hadleybeeman> hadleybeeman has joined #blockchain
09:45:07 <fabgandon> Hi, I'm Fabien Gandon, AC Rep. of Inria, http://fabien.info
09:45:14 <wseltzer> wseltzer has joined #blockchain
09:45:28 <marta> marta has joined #blockchain
09:45:42 <drogersuk> drogersuk has joined #blockchain
09:45:43 <mountie> https://www.w3.org/2016/04/blockchain-workshop/
09:45:45 <marta> doug presents the workshop report
09:46:38 <marta> interesting outcomes, some things missing. around 100 people there. We shouldn't limit our work here to what was the outcome there.
09:46:41 <mountie> https://www.w3.org/2016/04/blockchain-workshop/report.html
09:47:38 <marta> Un conference style, breakout groups, what are the things we can work on. We won't go through them today but please read
09:49:02 <marta> Digital assets group was formed, IPLD is ongoing but may not be W3C work, we have Interledger,
09:50:18 <marta> Manu: next workshop?
09:50:32 <marta> marta: yes, but after we detail usecases
09:51:01 <marta> manu: there are two events Rebooting Web of Trust and Internet Identity Workshop
09:51:58 <chained> chained has joined #blockchain
09:52:06 <marta> doug: The Blockchain and browser solutions focused workshop may also be an idea
09:52:41 <jeff> Jeff Jaffe, W3C
09:52:47 <brunoj> Bruno Javary, Oberthur technologies
09:52:54 <kjetil> kjetil has joined #blockchain
09:52:57 <mountie> Mountie Lee, PayGate
09:52:58 <kaorumaeda> Kaoru Maeda, Lepidum
09:53:01 <rmarques> Rodolphe Marques, BigchainDB
09:53:09 <JP> JP Abello - Nielsen & IoTC Privacy & Security
09:53:16 <jay> Jay Kishigami, NTT W3C AB
09:53:16 <chunming> Chunming Hu, W3C/Beihang, and Beihang University
09:53:19 <kiyoshi> Kiyoshi Tanaka, NTT
09:54:02 <stonecoldpat> Patrick McCorry, Newcastle University.
09:54:06 <boazsender> boazsender has joined #blockchain
09:54:08 <Hyunjin> Hyunjin Shin, Mtreecare
09:54:13 <marta> doug: tomorrow we should have breakout and we will add to the agenda defining what should we do there
09:54:38 <marta> mountie: we need to update the mission statement on the website
09:55:22 <marta> Marta Piekarska, Blockstream. Security Architect & Standards, AC Rep
09:56:21 <kjetil> KJetil Kjernsmo, University of Oslo
09:57:55 <Tomohiro> Tomohiro Yamada from NTT
09:59:43 <boazsender> Boaz Sender from Bocoup
10:00:38 <fabgandon> Fabien Gandon, AC Rep. of Inria, looking at what aspects could be of interest to one of the 200 research teams of Inria ( http://inria.fr/ ) and personnaly interested in vocabularies for blockchain and linked data aspects ( http://fabien.info )
10:00:50 <marta> missing from the workshop: solid next steps, key stakeholders.
10:03:09 <marta> wee need to fix that and figure out where we overlap web and blockchain and how we can get the key stakeholders
10:03:50 <marta> We have a blockchain community group, with a mailing list and weekly telcos. If you are interested please join
10:04:05 <marta> Another one is interledger
10:04:07 <wseltzer> https://www.w3.org/community/blockchain/
10:04:34 <marta> Means of communication
10:04:53 <shepazu> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-blockchain/
10:04:56 <mountie> mailling list : public-blockchain@w3.org
10:05:30 <shepazu> https://github.com/w3c/blockchain
10:06:41 <marta> 11AM Boston time, 5PM CET.
10:06:51 <marta> Telconferences
10:07:05 <marta> Thursday/Friday
10:07:10 <marta> 1h long
10:08:36 <marta> manu: back to back with web payments.
10:09:03 <marta> manu: agent we splitting off too early - chainpoint?
10:09:12 <marta> doug - it was not our choice
10:09:32 <marta> manu: maybe we should advise people to join us.
10:09:34 <newton> newton has joined #blockchain
10:10:29 <dcosta72> dcosta72 has joined #blockchain
10:10:42 <chunming> Is it ok to move 1-2 hours earlier, to make it easy for east Asian participants.
10:11:03 <shepazu> https://github.com/w3c/blockchain/wiki/agenda
10:12:11 <marta> we will send out agenda items and please add your own ^
10:13:09 <shepazu> https://github.com/w3c/blockchain/labels/agenda
10:14:06 <maryammjd_> maryammjd_ has joined #blockchain
10:14:46 <marta> if you have proposals send them on mailing lists and once it is more shaped then add to gihub. Github is less accessible.
10:14:51 <marta> we will poll the time
10:16:39 <marta> more communication channels? slack, rocket?
10:16:51 <marta> consensus is no.
10:17:08 <marta> depends on the number of work streams
10:17:37 <marta> if we have many paths then we might need more channels, but for now we need to focused things
10:18:33 <marta> doug: we need to focus on low hanging fruits of standardization and second is web and the Blockchain
10:18:51 <marta> is there a plan to align with other groups?
10:19:07 <marta> doug: we don't want to step on anybody's toes.
10:19:34 <crystal> crystal has joined #blockchain
10:19:35 <marta> doug: whom we should be talking to is one of the key plans
10:20:01 <fluffypony> "the Blockchain" as in Bitcoin, right?
10:21:14 <dcosta72> I guess not. I guess blockchain as a technology enabler beyond bitcoin (blockchain 1)
10:21:15 <mountie> I think CG will be able to talk about Public Blockchain in Bitcoin, Private Chain, Side Chain and or other types of chains
10:21:48 <fluffypony> a blockchain is just a linked list with hashes.
10:22:08 <marta> if you know somebody you should  tell us
10:22:36 <harry> harry has joined #blockchain
10:22:48 <harry> You can always comment in IRC
10:22:56 <harry> if there's a response
10:23:01 <marta> dcosta72: yes correct
10:23:17 <harry> audio time is more limited than written IRC time.
10:23:26 <kjetil> kjetil has joined #blockchain
10:23:41 <marta> f2f meetings
10:24:27 <fluffypony> Riccardo Spagni, Monero
10:25:10 <marta> is there a good reason to do a point to meet f2f
10:25:30 <marta> manu: do f2f after data collection on usecases
10:25:51 <marta> probably makes more sense to do f2f beginning next year
10:26:22 <marta> mountie - combine with some other group's meetings
10:26:58 <marta> mountie: should we always focus web and the Blockchain
10:27:22 <marta> ...maybe since we have CG we can do wider scope
10:27:30 <newton> newton has joined #blockchain
10:28:08 <mountie> weighted Centrality (https://docs.google.com/document/d/14TB-ika57VP45cATE8f-SfdEbAGklcZbYoQiyiExN0s/edit ) has non-web related issued.
10:28:15 <mountie> but hope to discuss in CG also
10:28:20 <shepazu> present+ Virginie Galindo, Gemalto
10:29:21 <marta> manu: lets not cut off discussion too early.
10:29:54 <marta> doug: web-relevant, not necessarily web-focused?
10:30:35 <Vagner_BR> Vagner_BR has joined #blockchain
10:31:24 <pirouz_> pirouz_ has joined #blockchain
10:31:52 <marta> any work in standards depends on people who join
10:32:47 <chessnmusic> chessnmusic has joined #blockchain
10:33:02 <shepazu> on people who join, and on people who actively participate and drive work forward
10:34:48 <marta> as Reuters: finance and  Risk, tax and accounting, legal, contentent publishing, government sector.
10:35:05 <manu> Present+ Manu
10:36:18 <marta> ...hyperledger got lost on defining what the expectations are
10:36:44 <manu> Use cases we care about: 1) verifying if an emergency responder is currently authorized to be onsite
10:36:47 <marta> doug:: our expectations come from participants
10:37:00 <manu> 2) Checking to see if an IBAN number has been placed on a government watchlist
10:37:13 <shepazu> q+ Virginie
10:37:26 <harry> Does Hyperledger have a stable spec?
10:37:27 <harry> https://github.com/hyperledger/hyperledger/wiki
10:37:33 <harry> Or group of specs?
10:38:10 <manu> 3) Seeing if a digital coupon has already been redeemed (coupon fraud)
10:38:19 <marta> Maybe we need to define what the Blockchain means in scope of web
10:38:34 <manu> 4) Seeing if a car insurance claim has already been processed (fraud)
10:38:56 <manu> 5) Seeing if someone has the credentials (training/education) that they say they do
10:38:56 <marta> David: it is a backend technology on the web.
10:39:25 <manu> 6) Checking to see if a doctor has their license (or has been debarred)
10:40:19 <manu> 7) Ensuring that a refugee that is onboarded at one camp can recover their refugee status determination paperwork.
10:41:07 <marta> virgine: we started off with way too broad topic "identity" and had horrible time. Please define detailed use cases.
10:41:17 <mountie> one usecase proposed by Diseny : https://blockchaincg.atlassian.net/browse/BT-4
10:41:21 <rmarques> intellectual property on digital assets. Attribution, provenance and licensing
10:41:23 <stonecoldpat> stonecoldpat has joined #blockchain
10:42:18 <shepazu> q+
10:42:23 <marta> tracking data sharing on the web
10:42:34 <harry> intellectual property of digital asssets sounds kinda sketchy. I'm happy with labeling ownership, but don't want to go back into DRM swamp.
10:42:52 <dan> q+
10:43:05 <mountie> q?
10:43:06 <marta> communication between things in web of things
10:44:30 <harry> So the report is classified by DHS but Manu has done a security analysis. Would love to see report.
10:44:58 <newton> newton has joined #blockchain
10:46:00 <marta> q+
10:46:26 <marta> dan:
10:46:26 <harry> q+
10:46:30 <harry> q?
10:47:02 <shepazu> q?
10:47:02 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #blockchain
10:47:10 <shepazu> q+ marta
10:47:17 <shepazu> q+ harry
10:47:19 <ARambocus> ARambocus has joined #blockchain
10:47:38 <jay> q+
10:47:40 <marta> there are so many groups that already work on the topics.
10:48:11 <marta> dan: no need for end to end solutions
10:52:22 <shepazu> d+ dan
10:52:33 <manu> q?
10:52:45 <marta> marta: we should look at use cases and def not build e-t-e solutions but rather se how we can collaborate with other groups
10:53:03 <burn> ack marta
10:53:05 <burn> ack harry
10:53:14 <marta> marta: not sure how the use-cases from manu translate to standards
10:53:18 <NCL> NCL has joined #blockchain
10:53:43 <marta> manu: they do, as you abstract from them and look at what APIs are missing and thats what you standarize
10:54:03 <shepazu> q+
10:54:05 <jay> +1 marta
10:54:14 <harry> So, quick notes
10:54:22 <harry> In terms of WebCrypto
10:54:25 <marta> harry: what has been done already by the other groups?
10:54:26 <harry> what is obviously missing is that
10:54:35 <harry> Secp256k1 from WebCrypto
10:54:47 <harry> That was brought up 2 years ago and rejected by the WebCrypto WG
10:55:02 <shepazu> q-
10:55:08 <harry> as they did not have it native already and did not see momentum to add it to their underlying libraries
10:55:22 <harry> That being said, that was two years ago so it could be brought up
10:55:26 <renato> renato has joined #blockchain
10:55:30 <harry> Re Verified Claims and other usages of data formats
10:55:41 <manu> q+ to note that Verifiable claims allows both JWT and Linked Data Signatures
10:55:45 <harry> you'd have to show it could not be done with JWT and other well-known and deployed IETF work
10:55:47 <manu> q-
10:55:55 <harry> JWT provides signatures over arbitrary JSON
10:56:12 <manu> harry, Verifiable claims allows both JWT and Linked Data Signatures - it's agnostic to the signature format
10:56:14 <marta> jay: We should focus more on the relevant use-cases. The scope will become too broad if we gather too many of therm
10:56:15 <harry> You'd also have to show some actual demand for Linked Data Signatures
10:56:15 <mountie> q+
10:56:37 <manu> harry: organizations in the group are using Linked Data Signatures - so we can show demand.
10:56:38 <harry> To my knowledge, there is no demand for linked data singatures
10:56:45 <manu> s/harry:/harry,/
10:56:45 <marta> q+
10:56:45 <harry> Can you list those organizations Manu?
10:56:53 <burn> ack jay
10:56:53 <harry> Or are they secret/classified?
10:56:57 <boazsender> q+
10:57:10 <manu> harry, Mozilla Open Badges - also Pearson and ETS are int he group
10:57:17 <drogersuk> drogersuk has joined #blockchain
10:57:37 <harry> I don't see why those use-cases can't be addressed by just adding JSON-LD inside of JWTs
10:57:44 <shepazu> q?
10:57:51 <burn> ack mountie
10:58:31 <harry> Having a normalization algorithm for digital signatures is what caused attacks in XML-DSIG, I see no reason to repeat a failed design pattern. If anything, people should be MORE careful with crypto/security in blockchain-based adversarial environments.
10:58:50 <burn> q+ dan
10:59:02 <shepazu> q+ dan
10:59:02 <shepazu> q?
10:59:28 <dcosta72> Q+
10:59:37 <manu> q+ to add a few more use cases, if that would be helpful.
10:59:44 <burn> ack marta
11:00:10 <harry> Obviously, you want to actually think through security aspects and not repeat IETF work.
11:00:42 <mountie> https://www.w3.org/2016/04/blockchain-workshop/report.html#commitments from Workshop
11:00:55 <burn> ack boazsender
11:01:00 <burn> ack dan
11:01:43 <Milan_Patel> Milan_Patel has joined #blockchain
11:02:10 <csarven> csarven has joined #blockchain
11:02:19 <manu> q-
11:02:22 <jay> q+ how to decide if this is a good or a bad use case?
11:02:38 <manu> q- how
11:02:40 <manu> q+ jay
11:05:44 <fabgandon> IMHO criterias: before the interest and before the presence of the right people, comes the "is it relevant to Web and W3C"
11:05:45 <burn_> burn_ has joined #blockchain
11:06:10 <harry> USECASE: Access to bitcoin wallet securely in the browser for payments
11:06:13 <vagner> vagner has joined #blockchain
11:06:41 <manu> USE CASE verifying if an emergency responder is currently authorized to be onsite
11:06:42 <manu> USE CASE Checking to see if an IBAN number has been placed on a government watchlist
11:06:42 <manu> USE CASE Seeing if a digital coupon has already been redeemed (coupon fraud)
11:06:42 <manu> USE CASE Seeing if a car insurance claim has already been processed (fraud)
11:06:42 <manu> USE CASE Seeing if someone has the credentials (training/education) that they say they do
11:06:43 <manu> USE CASE Checking to see if a doctor has their license (or has been debarred)
11:06:44 <manu> USE CASE Ensuring that a refugee that is onboarded at one camp can recover their refugee status determination paperwork.
11:06:48 <brunoj> USECASE verify a block is genuine inside a blockchain from a web application
11:07:06 <boazsender> Use Case: for wallets, we want some way to store and opporate on keys in a secure way in the client. I believe web cryto is working on this. Will the web crypto group's APIs suffice for wallets?
11:07:23 <harry> USECASE: Standardized REST API for blockchain access using normal JSON
11:07:42 <manu> +1 to the standardized REST API use case
11:07:45 <harry> (I suspect Interledger is up to that already, would like to know if they have a spec)
11:08:14 <jay> USECASE: rights management, trust management on WEB
11:08:39 <manu> USE CASE standardized data model for expressing primitives off of blockchain (returned when using a REST API)
11:08:44 <rmarques> https://github.com/interledger/rfcs/pull/90 interledger is working on an api but just for the connector
11:09:11 <shepazu> USE CASE (Marta) Things communicating within IoT
11:09:12 <dcosta72> dcosta72 has joined #blockchain
11:09:38 <jay> USECASE: WOT related BC components
11:09:42 <kjetil> manu: OK :-)
11:09:52 <dcosta72> For reference, hyperledger went through this same process: https://github.com/hyperledger/hyperledger/wiki/Use-Cases
11:09:59 <harry> HTTP REST stuff makes sense at W3C, re non-REST action, probably better scoped for IETF
11:10:18 <boazsender_> boazsender_ has joined #blockchain
11:10:23 <boazsender_> Use Case: for natural disasters/emergency skill systems: running a ledger with no "servers"- distributed networking. Network discovery/mngment from the browser, or maybe over BLE?
11:10:45 <manu> USE CASE Preventing fraud in the insurance industry (by registering insurance claims on a blockchain / shared database)
11:10:52 <harry> Although there's no in principle reason why W3C can't do non-HTTP stuff, but it would at least be polite to talk to IETF. I believe Interledger has begun discussing with them, it would be a good idea to follow them up.
11:11:04 <renato> USECASE: Blockchain use by the Music industry: https://medium.com/cuepoint/how-the-blockchain-can-change-the-music-industry-part-2-c1fa3bdfa848#.m462v6ppa
11:11:27 <shepazu> USE CASE (Marta) Tracking data that's shared on the Web, and measure who's accessing it
11:12:10 <marta> marta has joined #blockchain
11:12:38 <marta> RRSagent, make minutes
11:12:38 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/09/20-blockchain-minutes.html marta
11:12:39 <boazsender_> Use Case: for natural disasters/emergency skill systems: running a ledger with no "servers"- distributed networking. Network discovery/mngment from the browser, or maybe over BLE?
11:13:53 <mountie> generated minute is not accessable.
11:14:44 <jay> USECASE: hyper system centralized and de-centralized DB(permissioned)
11:15:54 <dcosta72> USE CASE anonymised deterministic passport real-time status validation on travel
11:16:18 <mountie> USE CASE calculating Weighted Centrality
11:17:18 <manu> manu interested in standardized rest api, data model, vocabularies for accessing blockchains
11:18:24 <manu> rrsagent, draft minutes
11:18:24 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/09/20-blockchain-minutes.html manu
11:18:51 <manu> rrsagent, make logs public
11:18:53 <manu> rrsagent, draft minutes
11:18:53 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/09/20-blockchain-minutes.html manu
11:21:47 <shepazu> TOPIC: tomorrow's breakout
11:22:22 <boazsender> boazsender has joined #blockchain
11:22:37 <boazsender> +1
11:22:50 <marta> we will send out the use cases today
11:23:49 <marta> tomorrow we will work on the use cases we find interesting
11:23:57 <rmarques> https://github.com/w3c/blockchain/issues/15
11:24:01 <mountie> updating mission statement suggestion : https://blockchaincg.atlassian.net/browse/BT-8
11:24:02 <rmarques> I tried to compile all use cases
11:24:10 <harry> Sorry, I'm against vanity specs
11:24:39 <marta> manu summarizez chainpoint
11:24:43 <mountie> another link for mission statement suggestion : https://goo.gl/KkfN3I
11:25:57 <marta> how is it different from regular tx?
11:26:59 <marta> manu: the height is not enough. The Terion folks that believe that there is a need for receipt.
11:27:15 <marta> david: why do I need chainpont
11:27:32 <marta> manu: because its standard format for reciepts
11:27:44 <harry> So, you get a local copy that claims you commited something to *a* blockchain?
11:29:28 <marta> virgine: how precise will be the deliverable
11:29:42 <marta> manu: the gap analysis.
11:29:59 <marta> dave: prioritized list
11:30:45 <harry> Re platform - Adam Back had lots of sidechain suggestios re Schnorr Sigs etc. that are also not supported by the browser.
11:30:58 <harry> I think we can discuss with browser vendors and Virginie what maintenance plans for WebCrypto should be.
11:31:50 <marta> harry, yes. We (Blockstream, Adam) have a bunch of ideas on Sidechains that could be incorporated. Eg Strong Federations
11:32:37 <marta> chain point.org
11:33:03 <marta> chainpoint.org
11:33:08 <manu> http://www.chainpoint.org/
11:33:48 <marta> its a proof of existence that it exists there
11:33:53 <harry> I think a clear list of suggested crypto algorithms would be useful for WebCrypto's future
11:34:04 <dcosta72> And at a point in time
11:34:11 <harry> (although it's going to be VERY HARD to get new stuff added even to WebCrypto 1.1, nothing new will be added to current spec)
11:35:06 <marta> it is not an implementation. It is a message that would be saved to the blockchain. Its a dataformat
11:35:50 <marta> There will be different anchors for different blockchains
11:39:04 <marta> chainpoint needed to hash out because they were overwhelmed with other competitors. There will be huge overlap but they needed to move fast
11:40:21 <marta> dan: not the fist time you are running into issues like this. Gather what are the needs for such receipts and just go to the companies that would need that solution.
11:40:31 <harry> I'd just do outreach while folks are here.
11:41:55 <marta> doug: is there an intestest to adopt this? If yes then we need to carve out something good: this is way too simple for w3c spec - we need tests, better specification etc.
11:43:06 <marta> dan: we need to harmonize the standarization
11:43:50 <marta> manu: next step is to reach out to them. I am on a panel with Factum next week
11:44:52 <marta> doug: who are the key stakeholders?
11:45:36 <mountie> q+
11:45:37 <marta> ..many people are in many communities. How can we identify them?
11:45:53 <harry> Well, key stakeholders for chainpoint would be useful as well rather than key stakeholders in general.
11:46:41 <brunoj> q?
11:46:46 <burn_> ack dcosta
11:46:50 <jay> ack jay
11:47:53 <manu> q+ to note banks have R3 and that may hurt our outreach w/ them.
11:47:55 <marta> mountie: banks, groups who have consumers. We have commitments from banks from my country
11:48:08 <brunoj> q+
11:48:10 <burn_> ack mountie
11:48:55 <burn_> manu:  banks already have R3 so it might be tough to get their interest, but it's worth trying
11:49:08 <dan> q+
11:49:10 <manu> ack manu
11:49:10 <Zakim> manu, you wanted to note banks have R3 and that may hurt our outreach w/ them.
11:49:29 <rmarques> Rodolphe Marques, BigchainDB
11:49:48 <newton> newton has joined #blockchain
11:50:11 <shepazu> Use Cases from this f2f: https://github.com/w3c/blockchain/wiki/Use-Cases
11:50:23 <burn_> bigchaindb: we don't need to talk with banks.  blockchain companies already have clients.  We should ask their clients what they need
11:51:13 <burn_> ??: at some point we need interoperability.  maybe R3 is a good example
11:51:35 <burn_> s/??/brunoj
11:52:03 <burn_> ack brunoj
11:53:12 <burn_> dan: "key stakeholders" is overloaded.  You need both actual users and the technologies.  You need to harmonize the technologies and verify that the stakeholders' needs are being met.
11:53:58 <burn_> ... for people that build, they need to agree on what's created.  For people using, it needs to be useful
11:55:17 <burn_> shepazu:  what will be discuss this afternoon
11:55:39 <burn_> marta:  how to increase participation, next workshop, and deliverables
11:56:04 <burn_> breaking for lunch . . .
11:56:14 <shepazu> RRSAgent, make minutes public
11:56:14 <RRSAgent> I'm logging. I don't understand 'make minutes public', shepazu.  Try /msg RRSAgent help
11:59:25 <lsc> lsc has joined #blockchain
12:12:40 <fluffypony> that was hilarious
12:12:57 <fluffypony> there were parts where I was actually in tears I was laughing so hard
12:31:16 <mountie> mountie has joined #blockchain
12:38:10 <rmarques> rmarques has joined #blockchain
12:51:41 <yun_park> yun_park has joined #blockchain
12:54:36 <Blah> Blah has joined #Blockchain
13:01:21 <chu> chu has joined #blockchain
13:04:01 <shepazu> shepazu has joined #blockchain
13:04:37 <stonecoldpat> stonecoldpat has joined #blockchain
13:05:45 <shepazu> RRSAgent, publish
13:05:45 <RRSAgent> I'm logging. I don't understand 'publish', shepazu.  Try /msg RRSAgent help
13:06:03 <shepazu> RRSAgent, make logs public
13:12:04 <kiyoshi> kiyoshi has joined #blockchain
13:12:24 <dcosta72> dcosta72 has joined #blockchain
13:12:34 <Tomohiro> Tomohiro has joined #blockchain
13:12:37 <Hyunjin> Hyunjin has joined #blockchain
13:12:48 <shepazu> Use Cases: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-blockchain/2016Sep/0088.html
13:13:07 <jay> jay has joined #blockchain
13:13:13 <fabgandon> fabgandon has joined #blockchain
13:13:26 <brunoj> brunoj has joined #blockchain
13:14:17 <shepazu> https://www.w3.org/wiki/TPAC2016/SessionIdeas
13:15:44 <Vangelis> Vangelis has joined #blockchain
13:18:03 <marta> marta has joined #blockchain
13:18:27 <marta> **after lunch**
13:20:57 <newton> newton has joined #blockchain
13:20:57 <mountie> https://www.w3.org/TR/web-payments-use-cases/
13:22:23 <marta> We will have a breakout session tomorrow what should we work on? Use cases?
13:22:43 <dcosta72> dcosta72 has joined #blockchain
13:22:59 <marta> mountie: in web payments we had root of use-cases and from that we derived the document
13:23:11 <marta> maybe we should look how to approach it
13:23:36 <marta> we have 1h for breakout
13:23:59 <marta> gathering more use cases might make more sense
13:26:12 <marta> we will try pre-categorizing tonight and tomorrow propose it during breakout
13:26:43 <jay> q+, first categorization and increase and gather the # of use cases if there is a time
13:27:15 <marta> first pass: how does it relate to the web
13:27:24 <marta> ack jay
13:28:35 <dan> q-
13:31:03 <marta> goals: plan for the telcos
13:31:10 <marta> what will be discussing
13:31:34 <harry> harry has joined #blockchain
13:33:45 <shepazu> https://www.w3.org/wiki/TPAC2016/SessionIdeas#Blockchain_Use_Cases
13:34:45 <marta> **participation**
13:36:14 <marta> mountie: Technical reasons, no assignee for each member, people are too focused on their topics
13:36:54 <marta> mountie: if we submit use cases then we can start assigning them to people
13:37:52 <marta> doug: do I understand correctly - when you input a use case you have ti talk about how it benefits you and it becomes your assignment?
13:38:24 <marta> mountie - not necessarily, but we need to establish who is interested in them
13:39:02 <brunoj> q+
13:41:58 <marta> we should catalogue all use cases and then say which ones we are commiting to doing
13:42:31 <marta> but having a list of all good or interesting ones is a good idea for record keeping
13:42:45 <marta> doug - but we cannot get stuck on defining usecases
13:42:49 <brunoj> q-
13:44:20 <brunoj> here is summary of my remark : I think defining a deliverable, milestones and assign for example chapters editing to members can make the CG move on
13:44:40 <marta> mountie - maybe we should give people chance of writing in their own language to help with language barrier
13:44:51 <brunoj> deliverable in that case would be a document and use cases would be most important chapter.
13:45:25 <marta> doug - mountie, thats a good point but we would need someone to translate it
13:47:20 <marta> **workshop** after we describe the use cases
13:47:32 <marta> **next 3 months** the document
13:48:42 <marta> then probably a workshop in January
13:51:08 <marta> **next 6/9 months** actual plan for what use cases should be standardized and how these should be created. With that we can propose creating an actual working group or interest group
13:52:10 <shepazu> RRSAgent, make logs public
13:53:20 <jay> jay has joined #blockchain
13:55:01 <kaorumaeda> kaorumaeda has joined #blockchain
13:58:03 <Wayne> Wayne has joined #blockchain
13:58:14 <Wayne> Wayne has left #blockchain
13:58:34 <newton> newton has joined #blockchain
13:58:48 <wayne> wayne has joined #blockchain
14:04:59 <newton> newton has left #blockchain
14:10:10 <mountie> mountie has joined #blockchain
14:14:25 <mountielee> mountielee has joined #blockchain
14:25:43 <kjetil> kjetil has joined #blockchain
14:31:55 <shepazu> shepazu has joined #blockchain
14:32:34 <newton> newton has joined #blockchain
15:16:51 <newton> newton has joined #blockchain
15:34:24 <newton> newton has joined #blockchain
15:49:24 <newton> newton has joined #blockchain
15:52:49 <mountie> mountie has joined #blockchain
15:53:33 <Zakim> Zakim has left #blockchain
15:54:16 <shepazu> shepazu has joined #blockchain
16:40:25 <newton> newton has joined #blockchain
16:51:40 <csarven> csarven has left #blockchain
17:02:30 <mountie> mountie has joined #blockchain
18:09:00 <harry> harry has joined #blockchain
20:19:18 <mountie> mountie has joined #blockchain
20:55:24 <kaorumaeda> kaorumaeda has joined #blockchain
21:24:55 <kaorumaeda> kaorumaeda has joined #blockchain
21:50:47 <kaorumaeda_> kaorumaeda_ has joined #blockchain
21:57:54 <kaorumaeda> kaorumaeda has joined #blockchain
22:42:59 <harry> harry has joined #blockchain
22:58:35 <newton> newton has joined #blockchain
23:02:14 <newton_> newton_ has joined #blockchain