Digital Offers Community Group

<scribe> Meeting: Digital Offers CG call

updates/feedback on charter/problem statements

IJ: Who has read the charter?

<ltoth> +1

<Steven_> steven

manu, david, ian, linda, steven

ltoth: Any suggested changes?
... regarding problem statements, steven asked for "rebate";t hat's the only feedback I've received so far

dezell: We should be clear that where work ends up may vary

Additional engagment

ltoth: Meetings happening with Coke. Also reached out to Mark at MAG

dezell: Gray and I were invited to speak with Coke
... main topic is digital offers, what conexxus is doing

ltoth: Any other engagement updates?

<manu> Ian: I've done some outreach lately

<manu> Ian: Mentioning to colleague that Best Buy and Amazon have had information shared with them. Maybe also AirBnB, IBM.

<manu> Ian: I hope that awareness will continue forward, but have not had anyone sign up yet.

Ed: I don't think we hooked some people who came to previous call ... as we get more involved in problem statements, then we can keep people actively participating.

<Steven_> need to drop

IJ: dezell, please reach out to Alan re: engagement

<manu> Ian: It's useful for us to coordinate if you're going to mention benefits of W3C membership

IJ: Previous call was good to hear other stories from new people

<manu> Ian: I want to make sure we open floor to participants bringing their own discussion topics.

<manu> Ian: We want to keep the discussion topics open, that's my understanding, do others think similarly

ltoth: Yes, I agree.
... need to get other people engaged and hear from them

<manu> manu: +1, thinking similarly, getting other input is helpful

<manu> It's useful to hear where others in the industry are.

VCT vote

Manu: Verifiable claims might be useful to represent coupons and loyalty card info

<manu> https://www.w3.org/2017/vc/charter

Manu: there's a charter for a new W3C Working being reviewed by the W3C Membership

<manu> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/33280/VCWG/

Manu: review through 15 January 2017

dezell: Bring your industry connections into play here.

Upcoming meetings

ltoth: We started with mondays at noon ET...for now we'll continue at that time

<dezell> +1 to biweekly

<manu> +1 for every two weeks

+1 for every two weeks

next meeting: 9 January

ltoth: I am hoping that Steven will work on rebate statement by then and we can review it

<ShaneM> +1

ltoth: I will send Ian the information who will send it to the list.

<Zakim> dezell, you wanted to talk about reviews and enthusiasm.

dezell: Manu, would you be willing to share some thoughts on the list about how to engage with people in this work?

Manu: I think the key is to give people something to talk around, to establish a common purpose.
... the question I have for the group is "what is our purpose for Q1 2017"
... that seems to me to be the next step, and we can use it in turn to bring more people into the group
... but I think real uptake will not happen until there's a technical proposal on the table (depending on who you are trying to attract)
... another question is audience of this group - business or tech?

[IJ our charter says]:

A report describing a series of (prioritized) industry use cases.

An analysis of what standards (existing or new in the ecosystem as a whole) might help address those use cases.

Optionally: Community Group reports to experiment with how to address the use cases.

ltoth: How do we turn problem statements into use cases?

<manu> Ian: We're in the listening phase, what do people want to talk about

<manu> Ian: Bringing people that have not worked together before, early listening involves learning how to talk with each other. They have things on their mind. It'll take us a bit of time to get terminology and frame of references aligned.

<manu> Ian: The easiest thing to do is the thing you're doing with Steven, write down the thing you're trying to do. Then we look at things that are written down, will detect a pattern, do some prioritization from the start, people make their case. Get a broad sense of where we might thing we're going to be working together.

<manu> Ian: A use case is a slightly more formalized statement, more detail.

<manu> Ian: If you ask about use cases, there are formal systems for doing things, don't know if that's what we need to do, set of actions/steps/flow?

<manu> Ian: I don't know if we need to go to that level of detail. Incremental progression, don't try to boil ocean, develop shared understanding of what we're talking about.

<manu> Ian: We start to understand where hairy problems are, then ask if we need new Web technology to solve those problems.

<manu> Ian: At that point, we start getting into gap analysis.

<ShaneM> I like the use case approach that illustrates the use via scenarios, and syntnesizes hard requirements from those scenarios. It is very organic and approachable.

<manu> Ian: Listen and refine as we go.

manu: I agree with much of what Ian said. We are in the listening phase.
... it would be good to listen a lot more before we write things down formally.
... but informally it's good for people to write things down and enable other people to add to them

<Zakim> manu, you wanted to explain how use cases documents tend to form

manu: it's good for people to write down use cases informally
... the future that people want to build

<Zakim> dezell, you wanted to plan some beneficial discussion

<manu> Example of Use Cases: https://opencreds.github.io/vc-use-cases/

<manu> CSV on the Web Use Cases and Requirements: https://www.w3.org/TR/csvw-ucr/

dezell: Perhaps Bob can give a presentation at an upcoming call ... and allow discussion

<Zakim> Ian, you wanted to ask about NRF Big Show