Verifiable Credentials: accessibility-related use cases.

<scribe> scribenick: Joshue108

<scribe> scribenick: Joshue108

JW: Scott made an interesting contribution to the verifiable claims use cases..

He also mentioned maps, route collection etc

Can be varied according to the user need..

In this case Verfiable Claims being used in a broader way that just the UI.

So it is not just the user interface that can adjust itself to support accessible.

JS: Happy to take it on advisement..

Long standing desire..

But there is a question around if this is the right place - to do x,y,z..

that linkage is not clear to me..

And may be taking Verifiable Credentials to far..

JW: I think that is right.. Verf Credentials is only one mechanism..

Not the only one..

It is another step to say this is the right spec - but it has potential to do it..

JS: There is also an issue around reliability and relevance.

<jasonjgw> Josh: suggests we identify what approaches can identify user needs and then select the appropriate technical approach.

JW: Once feature of Verf Claims that is not elsewhere is the privacy stuff..

Zero Knowledge Proofs etc - one may of making the case - or looking at it - would be to identify what this has that other techs dont.

Or UI dialogs that ask if the user wishes to share info..

They are something to think about..

JS: Also around mathing use cases to needs - etc Verifiable claims is great where the claim can be said to persist.

So the service animal use case is a good one..

Say valid for 6 months..

JW: So disability state for Gov benefit claims?

JS: Yes..

JW: So for more long term claims..

Stable profile over time etc

Worth looking at alternatives mechanisms for some things..

JW: So where the issuer and the subject are the same entity..

JS: There are also time implications and critical differences.

JW: You might want some info held securely.. some things may need to be worked out..

JS: Some of this good for a 2.0!

JOC: So where are we at?

JS: We have a killer use case! Service Animals would solve some big ones.

JW: Also the CAPTCHA related ones.

JS: Yup
... Also the verification of disability status is a good one.
... I've concerns on how this works on day to day..
... How will this be used?

JOC: It could be something pulled down from a server on a need to basis.

JW: They say there is an assumption that the user has a digital wallet that holds the credentials.

JS: That has problems of its own.

JOC: I wont be chipped.

-1

JS: The university idea is good, you could put it on an ID or similar.

JW: We are in the collection phase at the moment.. we can identify central and peripheral ones..
... So without discarding, we can prioritise and document and look at the ones we want to present.

JS: We only promised them 3 or 4..
... We are well on the way.

Preparation of working drafts for forwarding to APA.

<jasonjgw> Josh: the XAUR is ready to proceed to APA.

<jasonjgw> Josh: the RTC document is in the midst of reorganization to state the user needs more clearly so that readers can better identify what the needs are.

<jasonjgw> Josh is much more satisifed with this proposed revision. User scenarios could be added as supporting material or introduced alongside each user requirement.

JW: Sounds good Janina.

<jasonjgw> Josh: notes Jason's comments on the proposed reorganization. Josh indicates we can add a "scenario" to clarify any of the user needs that are not sufficiently clear.

<jasonjgw> Responding to Janina, Josh suggests that Janina read the reorganized version before taking it to APA.

<jasonjgw> Josh notes that the proposed format is better aligned with MAUR and XAUR.

<jasonjgw> Josh's question relates to the scenarios in section 3, related to quality of audio and of video.

<jasonjgw> Janina notes that the better the audio quality, the more effectively people with hearing disabilities can partiicpate.

http://raw.githack.com/w3c/apa/RTCUserNeeds/rtc/index.html#quality-of-service-scenarios

Here is the working URL for final AccessibleRTC http://raw.githack.com/w3c/apa/RTCUserNeeds/rtc/index.html

JW: All looks good - I some more comments and will forward.

JS: When we have CFC against a proper domain we can work with impunity.

JW: After CFC on XAUR is completed then you could move on the AccessibleRTC.

JS: So we are thinking to publish XAUR first and RTC later?

JW: Yes, but not too much later.
... Great to see APA actively publishing!

Miscellaneous topics and updates.

<jasonjgw> Josh plans to attend the Berlin workshop.

<jasonjgw> This is the Web/machine learning workshop.

This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.154  of Date: 2018/09/25 16:35:56  
Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/

Guessing input format: Irssi_ISO8601_Log_Text_Format (score 1.00)

Default Present: jasonjgw, Joshue
Present: jasonjgw Joshue Joshue108
Found ScribeNick: Joshue108
Found ScribeNick: Joshue108
Inferring Scribes: Joshue108
Found Date: 22 Jan 2020
People with action items: 

WARNING: Input appears to use implicit continuation lines.
You may need the "-implicitContinuations" option.


WARNING: IRC log location not specified!  (You can ignore this 
warning if you do not want the generated minutes to contain 
a link to the original IRC log.)