DID WG Telco — Minutes
See also the Agenda and the IRC Log
Present: Ivan Herman, Brent Zundel, Justin Richer, Markus Sabadello, Amy Guy, Shigeya Suzuki, Phil Archer, Dmitri Zagidulin, Dave Longley, Drummond Reed, Adrian Gropper, Jonathan Holt, Ted Thibodeau Jr., Manu Sporny, Joe Andrieu
Regrets: Daniel Burnett
Chair: Daniel Burnett, Brent Zundel
Scribe(s): Manu Sporny, Amy Guy
Drummond Reed: What time is the special topic call again?
Dmitri Zagidulin: Hi, from Digital Bazaar, generally a fan of this community.
Brent Zundel: Remember to rejoin the group
… Special topic call is today at 6pm ET today - Tuesday Jan 19th.
See github pull request #460.
Drummond Reed: I’m working on getting suggestions in – long thread - reformatting, no specific suggestions, not sure how to act on them. If anyone has feedback, please narrow it down to be specific to the changes that you’d like to see.
Brent Zundel: Reminder that special topic call today is a working session for those that want help writing PRs – if you need questions answered by the group to make progress, this is your opportunity.
Brent Zundel: https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues?q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+sort%3Aupdated-asc+-label%3A%22just+before+CR%22+
2. Issue Processing
Manu Sporny: https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues/292
Brent Zundel: This is to keep track of all horizontal review – TAG will do a review today
Manu Sporny: https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues/291
Brent Zundel: PING will be reviewing soon
Manu Sporny: https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues/425
Brent Zundel: https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues/425
Manu Sporny: still need to do it
Manu Sporny: https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues/530
Jonathan Holt: I have a template that I’ve used for other Linux projects, want to see engagement of the group wrt. direction – governance model, EIP or Aries to capture thoughts for the “why” – that may help the WG transition to a maintenance WG. I have a template – before I work on that, would love to get feedback.
… At least one person has said it’s a bad idea.
Ivan Herman: Only question is – why is it a pre-cr topic?
Manu Sporny: every issue we have has been assigned a pre-cr what we need to do before cr
… every issue is a pre cr topic save for two that have already decided more or less to defer
… everything gets a priority on what the group feels
Ivan Herman: there are a number of things we can sort during cr before the end of the wg
… This is one of those.
Brent Zundel: I think that’s something we can discuss on next Editors/Chairs call.
Manu Sporny: https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues/523
Manu Sporny: I think this was dealt with, I’ll check
… I think this was deal with but don’t remember, I’ll check on it.
Brent Zundel: https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues/199
Drummond Reed: Waiting on appendix.
Jonathan Holt: I’ll just make comments in issue – integers for epoch time was in scope, didn’t know it was in scope – thought we were using string xml - will make comment in the issue.
Brent Zundel: https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues/324
Ted Thibodeau Jr.: re 523 – I’ve not drafted a PR (and am not sure I can thread that needle, though Manu is confident someone can)
Manu Sporny: https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues/324
Joe Andrieu: We have no done anything, need to schedule a call w/ Adrian.
Manu Sporny: https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues/340
Brent Zundel: This is unassigned.
Jonathan Holt: Pending close
Manu Sporny: https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues/370
Adrian Gropper: I have no heard from EFF – this will disappear once Joe and I have the discussion we’ve just talked about.
Manu Sporny: https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues/391
Markus Sabadello: we marked this as potentially deferred - despite several attempts, no one volunteered to be assigned, we may still see PR for this this week - if not, we’ll defer it.
Manu Sporny: https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues/504
Drummond Reed: two parts – feedback on text, that issue, brent you reviewed it - Joe still has objection - not sure what to do with - not change in text, Joe we still need to find out what happens there. Move to different part of spec, note, fine w/ that.
… Need Editors to decide where it best belongs
Joe Andrieu: Maybe I’m looking at the wrong thing – I don’t see my issue.
Drummond Reed: Thought you were reviewing – PR 457 addresses this issue – shigeya raised this separately.
… This is a matter of deciding where we want to move that section.
Manu Sporny: https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues/72
Drummond Reed: That one is in progress, working on it, no PR yet - started drafting text… on the list for this week.
Manu Sporny: https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues/380
Justin Richer: this is resolved, it got renamed
Brent Zundel: pending close - think this has been resolved, if you feel it hasn’t jump on and say so
Manu Sporny: https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues/373
Drummond Reed: this is in process
Manu Sporny: PR 460 - need feedback on that PR
Manu Sporny: https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues/527
Brent Zundel: covered by 163, pending close
Manu Sporny: https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues/468
Brent Zundel: this is a potential defer, if you don’t think it should be deferred, volunteer to take it forward.
Markus Sabadello: There is a PR for this – maybe we should assign the person that raised the PR –
Brent Zundel: Daniel Buchner… PR 543 – assigning him now
Manu Sporny: https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues/399
Markus Sabadello: raised by ivan to clarify dereference function was defined in an abstract way - returns final resources - did raise a PR that exists now to add that clarification - whenever we touch on these topics, there are always discussions around what does it mean to resolve / dereference, what steps happen in which order.
… There is an ongoing discussion ont he PR
Brent Zundel: PR 544 is where discussion is happening.
Jonathan Holt: This also impacts 452 - composite key - I was going to do a PR for that one, let’s have some discussion when we get to it.
Manu Sporny: https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues/452
Jonathan Holt: https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5234#section-2.3
Jonathan Holt: In the comments, there are normative comments in ABNF rules - not an expert – if we are going to do a concatenation of strings - in essence what we’re trying to do is use a DID URL, composite key fingerprint identifier – conflicts – I am conflicted.
Brent Zundel: Excellent reason to come to the call today.
Manu Sporny: https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues/463
Markus Sabadello: follow up of last VF2F – abstract data model, different representations – what to name different things in DID Document, properties, entries, syntax, representation independent things… things like that, haven’t raised PR yet – diagram and concrete proposal for text change, will change that into a PR or maybe in working session.
Manu Sporny: https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues/170
Brent Zundel: Mike has committed to raising a PR for this one.
… if anyone else has more information to add there, jump on the queue, otherwise we’ll move on.
Manu Sporny: https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues/495
Shigeya Suzuki: I think the PR is ready now
… PR 540 was raised, please review
Manu Sporny: https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues/538
Brent Zundel: There is a PR that addresses this – 541
Manu Sporny: https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues/545
Markus Sabadello: In terminology section, DID URL dereferencing has DID Document as one of it’s inputs – so this PR only changes entry in terminology to make that consistent.
… What it means to resolve/dereference and what are dependencies – but there is a PR for this, think there is support for fixing this.
Manu Sporny: https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues/539
Joe Andrieu: We ended up focusing on resource=true, but not sure what boundaries were for herd privacy – I guess I’ll go through and suggest my own areas of suggestions.
Manu Sporny: https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues/556
Brent Zundel: Not assigned to anyone – question is about use of colons and how that relates to colons in other URNs
… Those who have knowledge and expertise – related topics were discussed – ABNF for DID – please jump on and comment there
Joe Andrieu: We did have one resolution – manu said he’d do it.
Manu Sporny: Yes, I did volunteer to do that…
Drummond Reed: I will address the use of ‘:’ in DIDs – was a lot of thought put into that
Brent Zundel: Next issue – moving to page 2 – security flaws in DagCBOR – issue 551.
Brent Zundel: https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues/551
Manu Sporny: I reviewed the DAG CBOR and canonicalization section
… I believe there are security concerns, jonathan has responded
… that the security flaws come from the ADM
… discussion continues
… there’s a PR to put the section at risk
… I don’t know if jonathan is raising a process violation or disagreeing with the editorial change
… That progresses
… We need someone committed to writing tests for DAG CBOR and the canonicalization rules
… and understand who is doing the two implementations
… if we can’t get that before CR we may want to mark as at risk because people haven’t committed to do the work
Jonathan Holt: As I mentioned in the issue – I appreciate any potential security flaws, limitation of ADM – recent change that makes list to infra set – how is that set ordered, really important – already had discussion about numbers/bigints – we were not going to explore that in spec – lastly in spec
… The potential process violation - you (Manu) as an editor, you’re flagging as at risk – I have a meeting w/ W3C to discuss this more.
Brent Zundel: The first step is to talk to the DID WG Chairs.
Jonathan Holt: Yes, still need to go through AC training… I have concerns.
Brent Zundel: I will reach out to schedule a time with the Chairs - Dan and me.
… I think that we’ve looped around.
… I think we’re done w/ issue processing..
Ivan Herman: nope – 404, still open.
Manu Sporny: https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues/386
Dave Longley: Since Daniel nor Orie are here – discussion is ongoing.
Manu Sporny: https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues/337
Brent Zundel: Orie isn’t here, moving on
… looks like conversation is continuing – that’s a good sign.
Brent Zundel: https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues/404
Ivan Herman: I have created a new PR 554 – minor change – discrepancy between examples and table of properties – my PR adds missing property – manu has concept, example might be something we don’t want – I don’t care, I care about consistency.
Manu Sporny: the general question for the group: is anyone in the group expressing a verification method in a service description today?
… the example, someone from the hubs community has said we want to use verification methods in a hub endpoint description
… if nobody is doing it, we can remove it from the spec. Doesn’t preclude it from happening
… so is anyone using a verification method in a service description today and wants an example in the spec to show that?
Ivan Herman: if that’s the case, manu you can close that PR and one of us can remove the example
Manu Sporny: +1
Ivan Herman: There is also the same problem as I have before.
… From a CR point of view, that issue could be closed… however, I added two PRs to registries.
… Added JSON Schema and SHACL and vocabulary – things that are in my view necessary for a proper definition, finished SHeX today – PRs for registries as related to 404 issue.
… That is not something that must be done before CR – but there are things that can be done once in CR, what URLs to use, etc… so - I leave it to the Editors how they want to handle it, otherwise issue should be closed.
Manu Sporny: proposal is to merge it in did spec registries in its current state and close the issue on DID Core
… we’re very close
Ivan Herman: but then there are still open issues in the registries
Manu Sporny: yep
Ivan Herman: works for me
Manu Sporny: https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues/559
Brent Zundel: assigning shigeya
Shigeya Suzuki: PR is ready, please review
Brent Zundel: PR 560, ready to review, will address this issue.
Manu Sporny: https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues/453
Amy Guy: if shigeya doesn’t get to that I will, on my list
Brent Zundel: This is a race between amy and shigeya on who wants to raise a PR first.
Amy Guy: we just rescheduled it for this time TOMORROW
Manu Sporny: https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues/119
Manu Sporny: rhiaro is on the TAG (for the minutes)
Brent Zundel: https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues/549
Manu Sporny: I’ve made a pass through the spec and noted testability of sections
… there’s around 153 normative MUST statements in the spec
… 43 of those are in the resolution and dereferencing section
… we had stated a while ago that it’s an abstract function, so there are questions around its testability
… people are saying it is, which it could be
… we need someone to step forward to write those tests
… and then we need at least two people to say they’re going to be implementing the resolution and dereferencing sections
… you’re implementing something that can make those normative statements real
… need more feedback in that issue
… there are multiple options provided to address these concerns
3. Use Cases
Phil Archer: Very quickly will show you where we’ve gotten to
Phil Archer: See UCR.
Phil Archer: -> https://w3c.github.io/did-use-cases/#domainMap
Phil Archer: Added a diagram – SVG
Joe Andrieu: Looks good – domain map
Phil Archer: Do please take a look at actions imagery – attempts to give you simple diagrammatic views of how DIDs work and so on – keen to hear if there are mistakes there – Joe’s been through them, if you see errors, please let us know.
… There are focal use cases beyond end of documents, things are autogenerated to reduce editing errors – we’re very aware that DID Core is headed to Candidate Recommendation, and once that happens Use Cases are done – we’re keeping that in mind.
Joe Andrieu: +1 to better readability in SVG
Ivan Herman: The letters in the SVG are a bit hard to read
Phil Archer: Yes, will try to fix this
Drummond Reed: Huge +++1 to Joe and Phil’s work on this doc!
Manu Sporny: a big thank you to joe and phil and anyone who participated n the use cases, we’re very lucky to have you work on the document, and the DID and VC ecosystem has some of the better use case documentation around that we’ve seen working groups generate
Dave Longley: +1 thanks to Joe and Phil!
Brent Zundel: With that, we can close todays meeting
… Thank you everyone for all the work being put in – we appreciate you all very much.
… Thanks all!