IRC log of digitaloffers on 2017-02-06

Timestamps are in UTC.

16:54:07 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #digitaloffers
16:54:07 [RRSAgent]
logging to
16:54:13 [Ian]
Meeting: Digital Offers CG
16:54:16 [Ian]
Chair: Linda
16:54:18 [Ian]
Scribe: Ian
16:54:31 [Ian]
16:54:44 [Ian]
Ian has changed the topic to: 6 Feb agenda =>
16:56:03 [AdamLake]
AdamLake has joined #digitaloffers
16:56:24 [AdamLake]
present + AdamLake
16:58:14 [manu]
present+ Manu
16:58:18 [manu]
present+ AdamLake
17:00:55 [ltoth]
ltoth has joined #digitaloffers
17:01:18 [manu]
present+ Linda
17:01:30 [manu]
present+ Ian
17:01:30 [dezell]
dezell has joined #digitaloffers
17:01:42 [manu]
present+ DavidE
17:01:47 [manu]
zakim, who is here?
17:01:47 [Zakim]
Present: Manu, AdamLake, Linda, Ian, DavidE
17:01:49 [Zakim]
On IRC I see dezell, ltoth, AdamLake, RRSAgent, Zakim, dlongley, manu, ShaneM, Ian
17:01:56 [SJS]
SJS has joined #digitaloffers
17:03:33 [Ian]
zakim, who's here?
17:03:33 [Zakim]
Present: Manu, AdamLake, Linda, Ian, DavidE
17:03:35 [Zakim]
On IRC I see SJS, dezell, ltoth, AdamLake, RRSAgent, Zakim, dlongley, manu, ShaneM, Ian
17:03:46 [dezell]
present+ dezell
17:04:14 [manu]
present- DavidE
17:04:55 [alyver]
alyver has joined #digitaloffers
17:05:05 [Ian]
present+ alyver
17:05:10 [Ian]
topic: Manu's framing document
17:05:30 [Ian]
Manu: We are currently brainstorming around use caess
17:05:53 [Ian] some point we'll need to organize into material that communicates clearly to people not in this group
17:06:08 [Ian]
..for those people new to this, i wanted to show people an example of where we might go
17:06:14 [manu]
Digital offers CG Use Cases:
17:07:03 [Ian]
See also WPIG use cases =>
17:07:33 [Ian]
...we define roles, needs, and tasks/requirements
17:10:29 [ltoth]
ltoth has joined #digitaloffers
17:11:20 [dezell]
17:11:36 [Ian]
17:12:51 [Ian]
ack d
17:12:59 [Ian]
Manu: We may need more market verticals
17:13:06 [Ian]
...or highlights some market verticals with specific needs
17:13:18 [Ian]
ltoth: So we would migrate materials from wiki to this structure?
17:13:22 [Ian]
Manu: Yes, changing as needed
17:13:47 [Ian]
dezell: We may need to identify financial service providers
17:13:56 [Ian]
(or PSPs as we call them, but FSP is broader)
17:14:15 [ltoth]
ack ian
17:16:17 [Brian_r1]
Brian_r1 has joined #digitaloffers
17:16:37 [manu]
Ian: It's difficult to jump to requirements after use cases...
17:17:03 [manu]
Ian: I can see using a formalism of roles to communicate use cases clearly and structure them, I don't have confidence that we'll get to requirement level in the IG.
17:17:06 [manu]
q+ to discuss requirements.
17:17:24 [dezell]
q+ to clarify whether roles are in/out
17:17:27 [manu]
Ian: If people start to write down specs, we may be able to get to requirements, I don't expect to have requirements in early stages.
17:17:30 [manu]
ack manu
17:17:30 [Zakim]
manu, you wanted to discuss requirements.
17:17:43 [Ian]
Manu: Agree with Ian that requirements are too soon for digital offers.
17:18:04 [Ian]
....agree that we need specs first before getting to the level of requirements (e.g., as we have done with payments or verifiable claims)
17:18:25 [Ian]
...the thing we are trying to do here is to create space in the document for when we get to them
17:19:17 [Ian]
...agree that roles and needs are high level, and requirements are low level and we would not get to them for at least a couple of months
17:19:24 [Ian]
ack dezell
17:19:24 [Zakim]
dezell, you wanted to clarify whether roles are in/out
17:19:49 [manu]
q+ to note that there are /some/ requirements that are easy to note...
17:19:58 [Ian]
ack manu
17:19:58 [Zakim]
manu, you wanted to note that there are /some/ requirements that are easy to note...
17:20:16 [Ian]
Manu: The other way to look at this, is that there may be some requirements that are important requirements for people in the group
17:20:24 [SJS]
17:20:39 [Ian]
...therefore saying something like "must interoperate for issuance, storage, and retrieval"
17:20:40 [Ian]
17:21:09 [manu]
present+ Simon
17:23:04 [manu]
Ian: What we may want to do is write down things we want in a charter. Like interoperability. There must be interoperability for issue, storage, and retrieval - it would help us keep in mind that there are specific actions on these things that are desirable.
17:23:38 [manu]
Ian: Rather than frame them as technology requirements, that end up being articulated as a future WG. It might be better to focus those as Charter Requirements.
17:23:59 [manu]
Ian: If we put stuff in the charter as aspirational, they can push back on it being too broad.
17:24:07 [ltoth]
17:24:11 [ltoth]
ack ian
17:24:12 [manu]
manu: Agree that doing that is useful.
17:25:07 [dezell]
17:25:11 [SJS]
17:25:19 [manu]
q+ SJS
17:25:23 [SJS]
17:25:30 [AdamLake]
17:25:35 [manu]
q+ AdamLake
17:25:41 [AdamLake]
17:25:51 [ltoth]
ack dez
17:25:52 [dezell]
ack dezell
17:25:54 [ltoth]
ack sjs
17:26:48 [ltoth]
ack adam
17:27:19 [manu]
ltoth: I find the document useful.
17:27:28 [manu]
dezell: I think it's useful
17:27:37 [manu]
SJS: Useful because it brings all the use cases together.
17:27:53 [Ian]
IJ: No objection to people trying to create a useful document; I am not ready today to adopt anything formally moving forward
17:28:03 [manu]
Topic: Vision 2017 and Digital offers
17:28:03 [Ian]
topic: Vision 2017 task force discussion
17:28:05 [manu]
17:28:43 [Ian]
Manu: Digital Bazaar put forth a proposal ... it tries to tie together a set of w3c activiteis
17:29:01 [Ian]
...payments, verifiable claims, digital offers
17:29:39 [Ian]
...Ian raised a question whether that discussion on web-based digital wallets and loyalty should shift to the digital offers cg
17:29:45 [Ian]
17:29:49 [dezell]
17:30:56 [manu]
Ian: One way to proceed may be for Digital Offers to do some work and you bring that experience back to the relevant group. For example, payment app that makes payments and apply coupons during checkout... we used PaymentRequest, and Verifiable Claims to do it, plus ARTS, and come back and say "we couldn't do it because of X, or Y".
17:31:38 [manu]
Ian: That seems to be very valuable information - web stack as its evolving does/doesn't allow us to do this. Implementation experience with things that are emerging. The premise is that Verifiable Claims could be used to do digital offers.
17:32:10 [manu]
Ian: If we want to be able to do digital offer redemption through checkout, and we could do everything through Verifiable Claims and PaymentRequest, then that would be a solved problem. Or we couldn't do it because that bit is missing.
17:32:19 [manu]
17:32:21 [Ian]
ack me
17:32:22 [Ian]
ack dez
17:33:42 [manu]
dezell: I think we spend a bit of time in the WPIG waiting to hear feedback from other groups, and that's okay.
17:34:09 [Ian]
dezell: Seems like digital offers CG should be thinking about wallets
17:34:51 [Ian]
ack manu
17:35:01 [Ian]
manu: I liked Ian's characterization of it ... it gives us a clear path to proceed.
17:35:44 [Ian]
...I think digital wallets will touch on various pieces of w3c work (payments, identity, digital offers)
17:36:11 [Ian] may be that the digital offers CG is not the right place for a broader wallet discussion
17:36:35 [dezell]
17:36:37 [Ian] Ian said, best way to help tie things together is to try to implement various pieces
17:36:39 [Ian]
17:36:53 [Ian]
...and see what the limitations are
17:37:07 [dezell]
ack dez
17:37:13 [Ian]
ack me
17:37:43 [manu]
Ian: There is other experience with this sort of thing, implementing some PaymentRequest/payment app API with interledger. Payment App making payments across ledgers using Interledger.
17:37:58 [manu]
Ian: There will be experimentation to try to put these pieces together and that will feed back into W3C.
17:38:38 [manu]
Ian: I'm not yet convinced that there is a "project" that is as high-level as digital wallets. Digital Wallets are a thing that people feel can help improve security/convenience, and yet it doesn't feel like W3C should be out to do digital wallets.
17:38:55 [manu]
q+ to note not "out to do digital wallets", just to ensure the stuff they're building fits together.
17:39:44 [manu]
Ian: Software could be digital wallet, or it could be something else. Is Digital Wallet a compelling thing to focus on, or capability usage, which is what we're going for. It feels easier to focus on concrete thing - redeem coupons at checkout. it turns out that that's a thing that people want to use digital wallets for.
17:39:44 [dezell]
q+ to talk about abstraction of wallet
17:40:12 [Ian]
ack manu
17:40:12 [Zakim]
manu, you wanted to note not "out to do digital wallets", just to ensure the stuff they're building fits together.
17:40:16 [manu]
Ian: What do we need to use on the Web to make that happen? Are digital wallets a side-effect? digital wallets are just software, not a capability of the Web.
17:40:25 [Ian]
manu: Now I think I see where the disconnect is.
17:40:36 [Ian]
...I agreee that the focus should be on the capabilities
17:40:45 [Ian]
..the suggestion was not to create a digital wallets CG or WG...
17:41:06 [Ian]
..rather, the term digital wallet is used as a term that is an umbrella
17:41:21 [Ian]
...but I agree that we should be focused on capabilities to address specific tasks.
17:41:38 [Ian]
...e.g., you are issued a loyalty get use it to make a payment
17:42:06 [Ian] digital wallet may be the wrong term, but the point is to have capabilities that enable things to work seamlessly.
17:42:07 [Ian]
17:42:21 [Ian]
ack de
17:42:21 [Zakim]
dezell, you wanted to talk about abstraction of wallet
17:43:26 [Ian]
ack me
17:44:37 [manu]
Ian: It may not be helpful to put payments, digital offers, and verifiable claims at the same abstraction layer - payments have to do with something I want to do over the web, same with digital offers. Verifiable Claims is not an activity in the same way, in my mind. Verifiable Claims is like an abstraction that encompasses almost every sort of utterance you want to make on the Web. it's too broad of a topic to go with the other two.
17:44:55 [manu]
Ian: If you want to do payments and digital offers seamlessly, and see how much verifiable claims can help, that makes sense.
17:45:24 [manu]
Ian: I can see some disagreement there, but Verifiable claims seems broad. It speaks less than payments and coupons, may need adjustment. List semantics thing that has a bit of friction for me.
17:45:56 [Ian]
ltoth: To summarize, the vision task force doesn't want to lose the topic...but not hearing anything specific new work
17:46:43 [dezell]
q+ to comment about running code...
17:47:18 [manu]
q+ to volunteer to add the use cases to the digital offers wiki.
17:47:33 [Ian]
dezell: +1 to Ian's comment - get experience through coding and seeing what we need, either in the IG or the CG
17:47:37 [Ian]
ack dezell
17:47:37 [Zakim]
dezell, you wanted to comment about running code...
17:47:46 [Ian]
dezell: The IETF has this mantra as well...
17:48:13 [Ian]
manu: I will add the use cases from the vision task force to the Digital Offers CG wiki
17:48:15 [Ian]
(IJ: +1)
17:48:37 [Ian]
topic: FTF agenda
17:48:45 [Ian]
regrets+ Kylie
17:48:50 [Ian]
zakim, who's here?
17:48:50 [Zakim]
Present: Manu, AdamLake, Linda, Ian, dezell, alyver, Simon
17:48:52 [Zakim]
On IRC I see Brian_r1, ltoth, alyver, dezell, AdamLake, RRSAgent, Zakim, dlongley, manu, ShaneM, Ian
17:49:18 [Ian]
ltoth: IG has 90 minutes for us at the IG meeting:
17:49:18 [Ian]
17:49:27 [Ian]
q+ re demos
17:49:41 [manu]
17:49:42 [Ian]
ack manu
17:49:49 [dezell]
q+ to ask about logistics for the meeting invitation.
17:50:14 [manu]
Ian: What is the expectation? To get them to the meeting? Or to do some demos with their stuff?
17:50:18 [Ian]
IJ: Is the expectation to get people from other companies to the meeting or just do their demos?
17:50:24 [Ian]
ltoth: Both
17:50:46 [manu]
Ian: Could you work with David on invitations?
17:50:47 [Ian]
ACTION: ltoth to work with dezell on a list of invitations
17:50:54 [manu]
ltoth: Yes
17:51:10 [Ian]
ltoth: Once we figure out who wants to demo, we will have a better sense of discussion topic time
17:51:22 [Ian]
(IJ thinks we should be sure to have 1 hour to go through use cases)
17:51:28 [Ian]
(Which means 30 mins at most for demos)
17:51:49 [Ian]
Manu: I would hope to demo storage of coupons and using them in payment apps
17:52:46 [Ian]
ltoth: Would it be better to do the demos up front or after discussion of topics
17:52:53 [dezell]
ACTION: Manu to make sure the digital wallet use cases are moved into the Google Doc, Adam to attempt to keep the Google Doc up to date.
17:52:58 [Ian]
Manu: I have seen it done either way
17:53:04 [ltoth]
17:53:32 [manu]
Ian: if the Task Force has been working for months, and work unrelated to task force, that would create some dissonance. If demos reflect use cases, that feels helpful.
17:53:35 [Ian]
ack me
17:53:36 [Zakim]
Ian, you wanted to discuss demos
17:54:09 [manu]
dezell: Simon, we'd love to have Kylie there - perhaps she can just walk over?
17:54:19 [Ian]
ack de
17:54:19 [Zakim]
dezell, you wanted to ask about logistics for the meeting invitation.
17:54:21 [manu]
ltoth: Unfortunately, no, she's in the UK. Already sent regrets, I think.
17:54:50 [manu]
dezell: We do want to get as many of our digital offers folks as we can to come to the meeting.
17:55:12 [manu]
dezell: Simon, don't know if you can get Kylie there, she's important for this meeting.
17:55:33 [manu]
Ian: We may need to do that via laptop w/ Skype/WebEx.
17:55:38 [manu]
ltoth: I can offer GoTo meeting.
17:55:47 [manu]
Ian: I've asked for a polycom system, which we have.
17:55:54 [ltoth]
17:56:09 [Ian]
topic: Next meeting
17:56:31 [AdamLake]
+1 to next week.
17:56:45 [dezell]
17:57:08 [Ian]
Resolved: 13 February noon-1pm ET
18:12:33 [Ian]
RRSAgent, make minutes
18:12:33 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate Ian
18:12:38 [Ian]
RRSAgent, set logs public
19:03:48 [alyver]
alyver has joined #digitaloffers
19:37:43 [alyver]
alyver has joined #digitaloffers
19:50:43 [alyver]
alyver has joined #digitaloffers
19:55:40 [alyver]
alyver has joined #digitaloffers
20:09:25 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #digitaloffers
20:40:14 [alyver]
alyver has joined #digitaloffers
21:25:20 [alyver]
alyver has joined #digitaloffers
21:55:12 [alyver]
alyver has joined #digitaloffers
21:57:18 [alyver]
alyver has joined #digitaloffers
22:37:47 [alyver]
alyver has joined #digitaloffers
22:48:21 [alyver]
alyver has joined #digitaloffers
22:53:08 [alyver]
alyver has joined #digitaloffers
23:33:06 [alyver]
alyver has joined #digitaloffers