14:55:08 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #did
14:55:08 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2019/10/08-did-irc
14:55:15 <ivan> rrsagent, set log public
14:55:15 <ivan> Meeting: DID Working Group Telco
14:55:15 <ivan> Chair: brent
14:55:15 <ivan> Date: 2019-10-08
14:55:15 <ivan> Agenda: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-did-wg/2019Oct/0002.html
14:55:15 <ivan> ivan has changed the topic to: Meeting Agenda 2019-10-08: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-did-wg/2019Oct/0002.html
14:55:16 <ivan> Regrets+ rhiaro, deiu, burn, dezell
14:58:33 <jfishback> jfishback has joined #did
14:59:35 <David_Trang> David_Trang has joined #did
15:01:04 <JoeAndrieu> JoeAndrieu has joined #did
15:01:07 <phila> present+
15:01:33 <Dudley> Dudley has joined #did
15:01:34 <brent> present+
15:01:39 <dmitriz1> dmitriz1 has joined #did
15:01:44 <bigbluehat> present+
15:01:47 <dmitriz1> present+
15:01:48 <markus_sabadello> markus_sabadello has joined #did
15:01:52 <MacTed> MacTed has joined #did
15:01:54 <Dudley> Present+
15:01:58 <ivan> present+
15:02:00 <markus_sabadello> present+
15:02:14 <David_Trang> present+
15:02:14 <dmitriz> dmitriz has joined #did
15:02:21 <dmitriz> present+
15:02:21 <Dudley> present+
15:02:34 <dlongley> present+
15:02:45 <jfishback> present+
15:02:53 <ChristopherA> present+
15:03:15 <manu> present+
15:03:30 <manu> scribe+ manu
15:03:35 <selfissued> selfissued has joined #did
15:03:37 <manu> brent goes over Agenda.
15:03:45 <manu> 1-Agenda Review, Introductions, Re-introductions  (5 min)
15:03:45 <manu> 2-Accept Previous Meeting's Minutes [1] (2 min)
15:03:45 <manu> 3-Assign owners to unassigned issues [2] (18 min)
15:03:45 <manu> 4-DID WG did-spec open PR Discussion [3] (15 min)
15:03:45 <manu> 5-CCG did-spec open PR Discussion [4] (15 min)
15:03:48 <selfissued> present+
15:03:52 <MacTed> present+
15:04:00 <manu> brent: That's the Agenda for today, any recommendations for additions?
15:04:07 <dmitriz> q+
15:04:28 <TallTed> TallTed has joined #did
15:04:29 <ivan> scribe+ phila
15:04:50 <brent> ack dmitriz
15:05:05 <phila> dmitriz: Can we talk about context hosting?
15:05:12 <phila> brent: I think that's one of the PRs
15:05:15 <ahripak> ahripak has joined #did
15:05:17 <yancy> present+
15:05:21 <ahripak> present+
15:05:25 <yancy> call in user from 612
15:05:35 <drummond> drummond has joined #did
15:05:36 <brent> q?
15:05:43 <drummond> present+
15:05:46 <ken> present+ ken_ebert
15:05:49 <ivan> Topic: presentations
15:05:51 <phila> brent: Anyone on the call who has not introduced themselves
15:06:03 <manu> s/presentations/Introductions and Reintroductions/
15:06:22 <drummond> @brent, I can do an intro, since I missed the last call
15:06:22 <bigbluehat> q+ to introduce myself
15:06:29 <drummond> q+
15:06:32 <phila> ahripak: I'm VP of tech at Credly(??) first time in the DID WG, excited to be here
15:06:38 <phila> q+
15:06:58 <phila> jfishback: I'm James Fishback, I'm privacy engineer at the Wootten...?? (sorry)
15:07:03 <dlongley> q?
15:07:10 <bigbluehat> ack drummond
15:07:13 <markus_sabadello> q+
15:07:14 <brent> ack drummond
15:07:23 <phila> drummond: I was at IIW last week, so missed last week. I've been living with the DID spec since it was born
15:07:24 <phila> q+
15:07:40 <brent> ack bigbluehat
15:07:40 <Zakim> bigbluehat, you wanted to introduce myself
15:07:49 <phila> bigbluehat: I'm Benjamin Young. I work for Wiley, and co-chair of hte JSON-LD WG
15:07:59 <phila> ... have followed along with interest as VC work has gone along
15:08:02 <ivan> s/hte/the/
15:08:09 <brent> ack phila
15:08:32 <phila> phila: introduces self from GS1
15:09:24 <phila> markus_sabadello: I missed last week too, sorry because of IIW. I'm from Danube Tech from Austria
15:09:37 <phila> ... I've been contributing to the DID spec for a while. Lots of travel recently on this topic
15:09:48 <brent> q?
15:10:00 <brent> ack markus_sabadello
15:10:01 <ken> ken has joined #did
15:10:13 <ken> present+ ken_ebert
15:10:25 <phila> brent: Our work mode says that we should formally accept the previous week's minutes
15:10:30 <phila> brent: Any objection?
15:10:31 <manu> +1 to accepting previous minutes.
15:10:34 <ivan> present+ kimhd
15:10:35 <drummond> If you want to fall asleep to the 2 hour webinar that Markus and I gave about the Fukuoka meeting, here's the link: https://ssimeetup.org/did-report-1-first-official-w3c-did-working-group-meeting-japan-drummond-reed-webinar-36/
15:10:43 <manu> rrsagent, draft minutes
15:10:43 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2019/10/08-did-minutes.html manu
15:10:46 <phila> brent: no objections so...
15:10:48 <ivan> resolved: last week's minutes accepted
15:10:54 <phila> resolution: Previous week's minutes accepted
15:10:59 <ivan> topic: unassigned issues
15:11:01 <phila> Topic: Unassigned issues
15:11:06 <manu> https://github.com/w3c/did-spec/issues
15:11:13 <brent> q?
15:11:15 <manu> https://github.com/w3c/did-spec/issues?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Aissue+no%3Aassignee
15:11:24 <TallTed> unassigned, oldest first - https://github.com/w3c/did-spec/issues?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Aissue+no%3Aassignee+-label%3Adefer+-label%3Adiscuss+sort%3Acreated-asc
15:11:28 <kimhd> kimhd has joined #did
15:11:35 <phila> manu: If it is OK with the chairs I'm wondering if we can assign the editorial ones to the editors?
15:11:50 <phila> ... i.e. can we auto-assign. That will save us time on the call today.
15:11:58 <phila> drummond: Fibe my be
15:12:05 <phila> s/ibe/ine/
15:12:14 <manu> https://github.com/w3c/did-spec/issues?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Aissue+no%3Aassignee+label%3Adiscuss
15:12:16 <phila> manu: So we're just going to deal with unassigned issues that are not editoral
15:12:28 <dlongley> s/my be/by me/
15:12:29 <phila> ... I'll go from the oldest to the newest
15:12:56 <sam_smith> sam_smith has joined #did
15:12:56 <daniel> daniel has joined #did
15:13:05 <phila> manu: explains importance of IRC
15:13:08 <manu> https://github.com/w3c/did-spec/issues/13
15:13:31 <phila> manu: Allow DID documents to be retrieved using any URI scheme
15:13:43 <phila> manu: We just need someone to volunteer to drive the conversation forward
15:13:46 <ChristopherA> q+ to "I'll do #13"
15:13:54 <phila> .. You don't have to write a PR, just push the issue
15:14:06 <brent> ack ChristopherA
15:14:06 <Zakim> ChristopherA, you wanted to "I'll do #13"
15:14:16 <manu> https://github.com/w3c/did-spec/issues/14
15:14:17 <phila> ChristopherA: Yes, I can take this on. It's something that BTCR uses, so OK.
15:14:27 <ChristopherA> q-
15:14:28 <phila> manu: Standardize the key revocation list
15:14:39 <phila> manu: How do we specify that a key has been revoked in the DID document
15:14:48 <phila> [Porridge]
15:15:25 <ChristopherA> I'm also interested in this one
15:15:28 <phila> daniel: One of the ways wold be, if it disappears from the DID doc.
15:15:35 <phila> manu: We need someone to drive the doc
15:15:45 <phila> daniel: I'm biased, so does that rule me out?
15:15:49 <phila> manu: No, that's fine
15:16:23 <daniel> daniel's GitHub ID is csuwildcat
15:16:24 <phila> ivan: To do that, I need daniel's GitHub ID so I can add you to the Team
15:16:39 <phila> manu: It's CSU WildCat
15:16:44 <phila> ivan: OK, I'll take care of that
15:16:59 <phila> brent: Another admin issue - area code 612 is who?
15:17:08 <phila> dmitriz: I think that's Yancy
15:17:10 <manu> https://github.com/w3c/did-spec/issues/15
15:17:10 <ChristopherA> #96 revocation will be hard, so if another assignee is necessary I'm up for it.
15:17:19 <brent> q?
15:17:21 <phila> manu: need rationale in spec for fully qualified DID references as the value of "id" fields
15:17:41 <phila> manu: Dan Buckner - you were hoping for a clean resolution, daniel you were also concerned
15:17:46 <phila> daniel: I'd be happy to take that on
15:17:48 <ChristopherA> (The #old 96 the new is #14)
15:18:02 <drummond> I don't see Daniel Hardman on the call.
15:18:41 <phila> manu: Just because we're assigning volunteers, doesn't stop anyone juming into the discussion. Anyone can commet on anything, we just need people to own the issue
15:18:42 <manu> https://github.com/w3c/did-spec/issues/18
15:18:53 <phila> manu: [PURPOSE OF THE SPECIFICATION] Is this draft specification trying to address too many topics when there should be more than 1 spec
15:19:09 <phila> manu: This is a statement that the spec is trying to do too much (Michael Herman)
15:19:13 <phila> drummond: I better sign up for that
15:19:15 <manu> https://github.com/w3c/did-spec/issues/19
15:19:26 <phila> manu: [Design Goals] all references to *identifier* management etc. should be changed to *DID Entity* management, etc.
15:19:43 <phila> manu: Again, someone needs to have a chat with Michael about that
15:19:55 <manu> https://github.com/w3c/did-spec/issues/20
15:19:55 <phila> drummond: I care about that language and I'm talking to Michael so I'll take that
15:20:13 <phila> manu: [Public Keys] re: referenced keys: Is multiple level recursion allowed?
15:20:31 <phila> ... again it's a Michael Herman issue. Needs to be taken by someone interested in key management
15:20:45 <phila> ... Some folks have been assigned but someone else would be a good addition
15:20:51 <dmitriz> I'll volunteer if nobody else does, re keys
15:21:00 <phila> drummond: I know that Dave Hewsby is interested. I don't know if he's joined the WG yet
15:21:08 <phila> manu: We can't assign to someone who's not here
15:21:14 <kimhd> s/Hewsby/Huseby
15:21:17 <phila> brent: He's not in the WG yet AFAIK
15:21:24 <brent> q?
15:21:30 <phila> mike: I do plan to drive this
15:21:48 <phila> s/mike/selfissued:/
15:21:51 <manu> https://github.com/w3c/did-spec/issues/21
15:22:05 <phila> manu: [DID Operations] "all the operations required of a CKMS" are not specified on the body of this section
15:22:13 <phila> ... another Michael Herman
15:22:33 <phila> ... need to look through the spec and match against MH's comment
15:23:04 <manu> https://github.com/w3c/did-spec/issues/22
15:23:05 <phila> ken: offers to take that one
15:23:17 <phila> manu: [Authentication] Is Authentication the correct mechanism for specifying the ownership of a Thing?
15:23:30 <phila> ... Again from Michael herman. What does authn mean in the context of this spec?
15:23:45 <phila> ... Maybe a discussion around authn and ownership. Any takers?
15:23:57 <brent> q?
15:24:03 <manu> https://github.com/w3c/did-spec/issues/22
15:24:25 <phila> ChristopherA: I worry that we get locked into something too narrow. That's my concern but I'm not sure I'm able to take this on
15:24:30 <dlongley> q+
15:24:40 <dlongley> https://github.com/w3c/did-spec/issues/2
15:24:43 <brent> ack dlongley
15:24:49 <phila> dlongley: This might be the same as spec issue 2 which I'm already assigned to
15:24:57 <phila> ... I'll be updating the text
15:25:15 <phila> dlongley: Issue 2 should say "re-write authn section"
15:25:34 <phila> manu: I have assigned it to dlongley. It may also apply to 4
15:25:47 <phila> drummond: here is terminology in that issue too, so I'll help with that.
15:25:53 <phila> manu: Great, I'll add you to that.
15:25:53 <manu> https://github.com/w3c/did-spec/issues/24
15:26:03 <phila> manu: make publicKey section more explicit for understanding of DIDs reliance on public keys
15:26:26 <phila> manu: From Kyle...
15:26:27 <ivan> zakim, who is here?
15:26:27 <Zakim> Present: phila, brent, bigbluehat, dmitriz, Dudley, ivan, markus_sabadello, David_Trang, dlongley, jfishback, ChristopherA, manu, selfissued, MacTed, yancy, ahripak, drummond,
15:26:32 <phila> ChristopherA: isn't this editorial?
15:26:32 <Zakim> ... ken_ebert, kimhd
15:26:34 <Zakim> On IRC I see daniel, sam_smith, kimhd, ken, drummond, ahripak, TallTed, selfissued, dmitriz, markus_sabadello, Dudley, JoeAndrieu, David_Trang, jfishback, RRSAgent, phila, Zakim,
15:26:34 <Zakim> ... brent, ivan, yancy, deiu, dlehn, bigbluehat, hadleybeeman, dlongley, Travis, ChristopherA, manu, rhiaro
15:26:38 <ivan> present+ JoeAndrieu
15:26:41 <phila> manu: Joe, would you mind driving this one?
15:26:43 <phila> JoeAndrieu: Sure
15:26:51 <brent> q?
15:27:24 <phila> JoeAndrieu: I'm happy to take that on. It's... a question for Kyle I think.
15:27:42 <phila> markus_sabadello: I'd be happy to work on this. It resulted in the long HR-14 discussion a while back
15:27:47 <manu> https://github.com/w3c/did-spec/issues/33
15:27:51 <phila> phila: All discussions come back to HR-14
15:28:01 <phila> manu: Cheap DIDs and the option to migrate DIDs between ledgers using standard DID Deprecation Registries
15:28:22 <phila> manu: This is a new discussion about cheap DIDs, migration, deprecation registries etc.
15:28:29 <phila> ... Any volunteers
15:28:43 <phila> ... It came from Peppo, collective1.org
15:28:55 <phila> markus_sabadello: I had a few GH discussions with him on this one
15:29:09 <dmitriz> I'll volunteer
15:29:13 <phila> manu: I'm hesitant to give issues to editors
15:29:20 <dmitriz> my github handle is 'dmitrizagidulin'
15:29:22 <phila> manu: Thank you dmitriz
15:29:28 <manu> https://github.com/w3c/did-spec/issues/34
15:29:38 <phila> manu: Should DID syntax allow an empty "method-specific-id"?
15:29:50 <phila> manu: Do we need a trailing colon?
15:30:08 <phila> markus_sabadello: I'm interested in all the ones to do with syntax, matrix parameters etc.
15:30:21 <phila> manu: Do you need a method-specific ID for a valid DID.
15:30:48 <manu> https://github.com/w3c/did-spec/issues/35
15:30:50 <phila> manu: It's a pretty straightforward syntax question that might open a can of worms
15:31:02 <phila> manu: Use colon separator or kebab-case for method-specific DID parameter names?
15:31:08 <manu> Do we do foo-bar or foo:bar or something else?
15:31:22 <phila> manu: This isn't matrix params, Markus
15:32:09 <manu> https://github.com/w3c/did-spec/issues/36
15:32:11 <phila> drummond: I was responsible for the original text that may or may not be there still. I want to make sure it's driven to closure so, OK, I'll take that
15:32:20 <phila> manu:
15:32:25 <phila> ... Looks like you, Markus
15:32:28 <phila> markus_sabadello: OK, done
15:32:28 <manu> https://github.com/w3c/did-spec/issues/46
15:32:37 <phila> manu: It would be useful to have `services` as a mapping instead of an `array`
15:32:51 <phila> manu: Looks like a job for a JSON-LD person
15:33:14 <manu> https://github.com/w3c/did-spec/issues/47
15:33:20 <dezell> dezell has joined #did
15:33:25 <phila> dlongley: Put me on there
15:33:39 <phila> manu: Should "id" be mandatory for "service" and "publicKey"?
15:33:55 <phila> manu: I think you, Markus, raised this but you have a lot already. Anyone else?
15:34:05 <dmitriz> I'll take it if nobody else does.
15:34:13 <phila> ChristopherA: is this more of a JSON-LD issue
15:34:34 <phila> manu: It's an identification issue. It's how do we identify things in the DID doc
15:34:55 <dmitriz> (I think this is more a philosophical question, rather than -LD one)
15:34:56 <dezell> present+
15:35:01 <phila> ChristopherA: So, not me, but it feels like it needs some JSON-LD knowledge. This is an area where I keep hitting a problem
15:35:09 <phila> dmitriz: has volunteered
15:35:13 <manu> https://github.com/w3c/did-spec/issues/49
15:35:23 <phila> manu: If an existing DID Document has a Service Endpoint fragment, what are the primary keys to be used if that Service Endpoint needs to be replaced, updated, or deleted?
15:35:46 <phila> manu: So this has to do with... Someone needs to look into this
15:36:02 <phila> kimhd: Markus suggested it was out of scope
15:36:10 <phila> drummond: It's out of scope
15:36:17 <phila> [general agreement that this is out of scope]
15:36:56 <manu> https://github.com/w3c/did-spec/issues/51
15:37:05 <phila> manu: [Convention] Method `0` (zero) become a well-known method for retrieving properties/metadata from/about a particular DID Server
15:37:18 <phila> manu: One for you kimhd?
15:37:29 <phila> kimhd: If anyone has any strong opinions, great, otherwise, sure
15:37:47 <phila> manu: Sounds like Markus and Kim
15:37:49 <manu> https://github.com/w3c/did-spec/issues/57
15:37:58 <phila> manu: Clarification of other verification methods in authentication section missing
15:38:19 <phila> manu: There is an undocumented thing in the spec that talks about verification methods
15:38:42 <phila> ... we talk about these verification methods and Oliver is raising questions about whether there will be a registry or similar
15:38:46 <markus_sabadello> q+
15:38:47 <dmitriz> i'll volunteer (since I have some PRs pending in the proof
15:38:51 <dmitriz> specs)
15:38:59 <brent> ack markus_sabadello
15:39:10 <phila> markus_sabadello: You mentioned authn ... verification method, Isn't that a proof?
15:39:23 <phila> manu: This is what needs to be written down
15:39:24 <kimhd> I could do this
15:39:30 <phila> dmitriz: I think I'll volunteer for this one
15:39:42 <phila> q- markus_sabadello
15:39:48 <phila> kimhd: I'd be interested in this one
15:40:01 <ChristopherA> q+
15:40:03 <phila> manu: So i'm linking dlongley, kimhd and dmitriz for this one
15:40:09 <phila> manu: So good - all issues assigned.
15:40:17 <brent> ack ChristopherA
15:40:22 <daniel> What is the expected way to discuss these things?
15:40:43 <phila> ChristopherA: The pattern was one person per issue, by the end it was multiple people. I wanted to add my name to the revocation one from earlier on
15:40:48 <daniel> Does this group have some set of expected ways to communicate/discuss our issues
15:40:52 <phila> manu: That's Issue 14 I think
15:40:52 <daniel> ?
15:41:26 <phila> ChristopherA: If anyone else hesitated because the pattern at the beginning was single issue owner.
15:41:38 <phila> manu: I'm going to add Oliver to ?? as he was interested on the list
15:41:51 <ivan> s/??/14/
15:42:17 <phila> brent: There's a question about work mode - There's a page about this
15:42:33 <phila> ... Once an issue is assigned, jump into GH and get involved
15:42:40 <brent> q?
15:42:44 <phila> ... Most of the discussion will be in the issue tracker and PRs
15:42:51 <phila> Topic: Open PRs
15:42:56 <ChristopherA> Daniel, Issue assignees don't have to make decisions, only help drive agenda to resolve it. I think using mail list for this one is fine.
15:43:03 <phila> brent: Let's start with the ones open in our DiD spec
15:43:16 <phila> brent: Recall that dmitriz Asked about context hosting
15:43:23 <phila> manu: OK, let's take that one first
15:43:35 <phila> dmitriz: It's an issue targeting a PR
15:43:44 <phila> [scribe calls for a link please]
15:44:09 <phila> dmitriz: The issue asked whether we're going to host the ... [distracted]
15:44:43 <phila> brent: Issue 5 - where will the context he hosted, assigned to chairs and Ivan
15:44:52 <phila> dmitriz: I'd like to say a couple of words... never mind
15:44:57 <phila> ... Take it to the issue
15:44:59 <manu> https://github.com/w3c/did-spec/pulls
15:45:07 <phila> manu: Here are the pull requests
15:45:51 <brent> q?
15:45:52 <ChristopherA> I was hoping to talk about 63 at some point
15:45:59 <manu> https://github.com/w3c/did-spec/pull/54
15:46:03 <ivan> subtopic: pull 54
15:46:05 <phila> manu: I'll try and pull some easier ones
15:46:16 <phila> manu: Minor, essentially editorial changes
15:46:24 <ivan> https://github.com/w3c/did-spec/pull/54
15:46:33 <phila> manu: Ivan has gone through and made sure that references are correct.
15:46:34 <ChristopherA> +1
15:46:37 <phila> ... Anyobjections?
15:46:46 <phila> manu: No objections
15:46:53 <phila> ... I'll go ahead and merge
15:47:33 <phila> manu: There are 4 pull requests to add more content to the data model section on IDs, DID docs, crypto keys and on services
15:47:35 <ivan> subtopic: adding more content
15:47:37 <phila> ... All explaining things
15:47:45 <manu> https://github.com/w3c/did-spec/pull/29
15:47:52 <phila> manu: I don't think we have enough review to pull these in for now
15:47:54 <manu> https://github.com/w3c/did-spec/pull/30
15:47:59 <manu> https://github.com/w3c/did-spec/pull/31
15:48:08 <manu> https://github.com/w3c/did-spec/pull/32
15:48:31 <phila> manu: We have three reviews but they're all people from the same organisation - needs wider review
15:48:46 <phila> manu: I think they're editorial but we need someone else to review
15:48:59 <phila> ken: I'll do it
15:49:14 <phila> drummond: I think I should do it too - by the end of the week
15:49:29 <phila> ivan: Shall we add the reviewers to the issue?
15:49:33 <phila> ivan: I can do that afterwards
15:49:38 <phila> manu: yeah but I'll forget
15:49:46 <phila> [MANU REMEMBER TO DO THIS]
15:49:56 <phila> manu: Everything else is under active debate
15:50:05 <phila> ... I don't think we can get into the meat of these today
15:50:15 <ivan> subtopic: calling for conversations
15:50:18 <phila> ... I'll just point out that we need more people involved in the conversation
15:50:41 <phila> manu: There are several things that refer to things that might get changed in the DID doc
15:50:50 <manu> https://github.com/w3c/did-spec/pull/26
15:50:51 <manu> https://github.com/w3c/did-spec/pull/27
15:50:53 <manu> https://github.com/w3c/did-spec/pull/28
15:51:05 <phila> manu: please weigh in on those
15:51:30 <phila> ... want to simplify the spec by removing stuff we don't think people will implement. But some people are suggesting that they will implemente.
15:51:43 <ivan> subtopic: matrix parameters
15:51:44 <manu> https://github.com/w3c/did-spec/pull/59
15:51:46 <manu> https://github.com/w3c/did-spec/pull/56
15:51:47 <manu> https://github.com/w3c/did-spec/pull/51
15:51:47 <phila> ... Other important discussion that we need input on are the matrix parameter
15:51:59 <manu> https://github.com/w3c/did-spec/pull/59
15:52:03 <manu> https://github.com/w3c/did-spec/pull/60
15:52:05 <manu> https://github.com/w3c/did-spec/pull/61
15:52:06 <manu> https://github.com/w3c/did-spec/pull/62
15:52:08 <brent> q?
15:52:11 <phila> phila: Offers/commits to look at those
15:52:27 <phila> ChristopherA: I've commented on PR 26, but it's not my PR
15:52:37 <phila> ... I don't disapprive, but I think something else has to be written
15:53:09 <phila> manu: It's helpful if you object - suggest the kind of language you would find acceptable
15:53:11 <ivan> s/disapprive/disapprove/
15:53:17 <phila> ... then people can take their view
15:53:28 <phila> ChristopherA: It's more of a UI problem. I was trying to use the review feature
15:53:39 <phila> ... OK, I'll take care of it...
15:53:52 <phila> brent: I shojld jump in and say that we plan to move pretty quickly.
15:54:05 <phila> ... If your response to a merge is "why did that get merged" - tell us.
15:54:17 <phila> ... Part of our working mode is to act fast but undo if needs be
15:54:29 <phila> s/shojld/should/
15:54:33 <ivan> topic: public key formats
15:54:36 <phila> manu: Last 2 are about publick key formats
15:54:37 <manu> https://github.com/w3c/did-spec/pull/56
15:54:42 <ivan> s/topic/subptopic/
15:54:52 <manu> https://github.com/w3c/did-spec/pull/63
15:54:54 <phila> manu: Oliver said he's like to see an Etherium address
15:55:05 <phila> ... And I think it was Transmte that wanted a hex format
15:55:15 <phila> ... Feedback on how we express public keys woud be helpful
15:55:23 <ChristopherA> I think this needs a larger conversation
15:55:24 <daniel> We need PEM at least
15:55:44 <phila> selfissued: We should be removing redundant stuff, not adding to it
15:55:54 <drummond> q+
15:55:55 <phila> ChristopherA: I'd like a longer discussion about this
15:56:16 <TallTed> Lossless translation between formats increases interop more than One Format To Rule Them All.
15:56:17 <markus_sabadello> +1 to longer discussion about this is still needed
15:56:23 <brent> q?
15:56:24 <phila> ChristopherA: Unlike schemas, you can't do it yourself (adding a new format)
15:56:26 <daniel> You mean the RSA compression?
15:56:37 <phila> manu: I think that's a clear question to the chairs to schedule some time
15:56:51 <daniel> RSA keys are huge, so does JWK allow for the slimmer representation?
15:56:52 <phila> drummond: We mentioned that there were 2 sessions at IIW
15:57:02 <phila> ... One from Mike Huseby and I spoke to Mike Jones about it too.
15:57:07 <phila> ... def need more time
15:57:27 <phila> daniel: ... support RSA stuff... (lost it)
15:57:36 <daniel> sorry, that was Daniel
15:57:59 <Dudley> Dudley has joined #did
15:58:05 <phila> daniel: Compressed format RSA - is that still possible?
15:58:20 <phila> RRSAgent, draft minutes
15:58:20 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2019/10/08-did-minutes.html phila
15:58:22 <daniel> Does JWT allow for all of the same features of the other formats?
15:58:31 <phila> manu: Clearly we have to have a discussion on this
15:58:45 <manu> https://github.com/w3c-ccg/did-spec/pulls
15:58:47 <ivan> topic: ccg PR-s
15:59:00 <phila> manu: There are two. I need to move them over to the spec.
15:59:14 <phila> ... The other one is dmitriz's explainer about context files
15:59:31 <phila> ... Johnny Crunch (?)'s PR has been there for a very long time
15:59:39 <daniel> Not worried about JWT's current set of registered keys, more about if it has or would allow the slimmer RSA format
15:59:40 <phila> ... That would close the PRs on the DID spec
15:59:43 <ChristopherA> +1
15:59:48 <phila> ... And I suggest that we then archive the CCG DID spec
15:59:59 <phila> ivan: You mean archive the repo?
16:00:08 <phila> manu: yes, the CCG repo should be archived
16:00:25 <phila> JoeAndrieu: There was an issue about signatures too
16:00:28 <ChristopherA> CCG meeting is starting. See you there.
16:00:31 <manu> I can talk that offline w/ JoeAndrieu / CCG.
16:00:37 <phila> brent: I think that's better taken offline
16:00:42 <phila> brent: Closes the meeting on time
16:00:50 <ivan> rrsagent, draft minutes
16:00:50 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2019/10/08-did-minutes.html ivan