22:53:52 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #did
22:53:52 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2020/02/25-did-irc
22:53:56 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #did
22:54:23 <manu> Meeting: DID WG Telecon (US-APac)
22:54:26 <manu> rrsagent, make logs public
22:54:31 <manu> rrsagent, draft minutes
22:54:31 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2020/02/25-did-minutes.html manu
22:58:41 <brent> brent has joined #did
22:58:50 <brent> present+
23:00:24 <markus_sabadello> markus_sabadello has joined #did
23:01:17 <JoeAndrieu> JoeAndrieu has joined #did
23:01:42 <justin_r> justin_r has joined #did
23:01:49 <justin_r> present+
23:02:21 <brent> Chair: brent
23:02:30 <JoeAndrieu> present+
23:02:57 <brent> rrsagent draft minutes
23:03:05 <brent> rrsagent, draft minutes
23:03:05 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2020/02/25-did-minutes.html brent
23:03:16 <brent> rrsagent, make logs public
23:03:39 <Orie> Orie has joined #did
23:03:54 <Orie> present+
23:04:20 <markus_sabadello> scribe: markus_sabadello
23:04:31 <markus_sabadello> scribenick: markus_sabadello
23:04:35 <jingxuan> jingxuan has joined #did
23:05:03 <markus_sabadello> topic: Agenda Review
23:05:14 <markus_sabadello> brent: We will talk about what consensus means
23:05:31 <markus_sabadello> brent: The editors are going to discuss the PR process, work mode
23:05:40 <markus_sabadello> brent: Then we will have the status check of issues
23:05:49 <markus_sabadello> brent: Any requests for changes/additions to the agenda?
23:05:50 <justin_r> q+ to ask about pull requests
23:06:01 <brent> ack justin_r
23:06:01 <Zakim> justin_r, you wanted to ask about pull requests
23:06:12 <markus_sabadello> justin_r: Are we going to take time to go over merged PRs? There has been some work lately
23:06:24 <markus_sabadello> brent: We will touch on this a bit
23:06:45 <markus_sabadello> brent: Anyone here for the first time who wants to introduce themselves?
23:07:06 <Orie> welcome!
23:07:07 <markus_sabadello> jingxuan: Hi, I am from China
23:07:16 <kdenhartog> kdenhartog has joined #did
23:07:16 <markus_sabadello> brent: Reintroductions? Volunteeers?
23:07:35 <kdenhartog> present+
23:07:37 <markus_sabadello> brent: drummond, thank you for volunteering
23:08:07 <dbuc> dbuc has joined #did
23:08:22 <markus_sabadello> drummond: Chief Trust Officer at Evernym, working on DIDs since the start. Evernym has been involved since the outset at the CCG. I am one of the three editors on the spec. I live in Seattle, am a Sea Hawks fan!
23:08:26 <manu> present+
23:08:37 <brent> Topic: A brief note about strong consensus
23:08:55 <drummond> drummond has joined #did
23:08:57 <markus_sabadello> brent: What does it mean for us to have consensus at W3C
23:08:58 <JoeAndrieu_> JoeAndrieu_ has joined #did
23:09:02 <drummond> present+
23:09:07 <markus_sabadello> brent: Strong consensus model, this is a bit more than what other SDOs go for
23:09:33 <markus_sabadello> brent: We're aiming for everyone to agree that what we produced is agreed to by the whole group
23:09:54 <markus_sabadello> brent: Want to remind the group that as we raise PRs and discuss issues, we want to be especially sensitive to other opinions, we have to take them into account
23:10:06 <markus_sabadello> brent: We all want to get to a point where we all agree to what we are producing
23:10:25 <brent> q?
23:10:27 <markus_sabadello> brent: As we work on PRs and raise issues, it's very important for our goal of consensus, to be nice to each other
23:10:29 <manu> q+
23:10:35 <brent> ack manu
23:10:44 <markus_sabadello> manu: I wanted to +1 that, and outline what that looks like in practice
23:10:56 <markus_sabadello> manu: We're trying to get more people in the WG to raise PRs and participate in discussions.
23:11:10 <markus_sabadello> manu: When people participate, it's really important to pay attention to people who are not necessarily agreeing with you
23:11:20 <drummond> q?
23:11:31 <markus_sabadello> manu: When you drive a discussion, try to make sure you are paying attention to what people are saying.
23:12:16 <markus_sabadello> manu: Regarding PRs, it may seem like editors are pedantic or pushing back or slow to pull in PRs, usually that is because editors are trying to make sure that when the PR is merged, it is difficult for others to argue that it shouldn't have been merged.
23:12:30 <markus_sabadello> manu: Basically we're trying not to steamroll people. Keep this in mind when you're processing issues and PRs.
23:12:38 <brent> q?
23:12:46 <markus_sabadello> manu: We're trying to get broad consensus.
23:12:49 <brent> Topic: PR Process
23:13:06 <manu> q+
23:13:12 <brent> ack manu
23:13:33 <markus_sabadello> manu: What the editors wanted to make sure is the standard process for discussing issues.
23:14:03 <markus_sabadello> manu: When a new issue is raised, if the person is in the WG, they get "assigned" to the issue to drive it.
23:14:33 <markus_sabadello> manu: The person who raised the issue should drive the discussion, until they are happy with the outcome
23:15:00 <markus_sabadello> manu: Next step is general discussion, reach out to others who may have an opinion. You should drive the issue to a concrete change (rather than only having meta-discussions).
23:15:00 <markus_sabadello> manu: Once you reach that point, you can attach tags to the issue.
23:15:04 <manu> https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues?q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+label%3A%22ready+for+PR%22
23:15:08 <markus_sabadello> manu: One tag is "ready-for-PR"
23:15:26 <sumita> sumita has joined #did
23:15:38 <markus_sabadello> manu: This tag says we got to some closure for this issue, now we need someone to write a PR. Ideally you or some other participant of the discussion should write the PR.
23:15:51 <markus_sabadello> manu: If that's not possible, you can ask editors to look that your issue.
23:16:07 <markus_sabadello> manu: When a PR is raised, there is another tag you should use "PR-exists"
23:16:22 <markus_sabadello> manu: This says the issue is associated with a PR, this usually triggers more discussion on the PR.
23:17:00 <markus_sabadello> manu: At this point, all discussion typically happens in the PR. You should expect the PR to settle down over time. There is some fine-tuning until editors believe the PR can be merged without objections.
23:17:23 <markus_sabadello> manu: If there is more and more disagreement, it's probably a bad PR. You need to go back to the drawing board and create a new PR.
23:17:45 <markus_sabadello> manu: Often this happens when the PR is too big.
23:18:22 <markus_sabadello> manu: After discussing the PR, the PR is merged. Then a new tag is added to an issue "ready-to-close".
23:18:39 <brent> q?
23:18:46 <markus_sabadello> manu: You, as member of the WG, should be able to do all of this yourself, EXCEPT for the actual merging of the PR (this is done by editors).
23:18:50 <drummond> q+
23:18:55 <markus_sabadello> manu: Questions about this process?
23:18:55 <brent> ack drummond
23:18:59 <dmitriz> dmitriz has joined #did
23:19:03 <dmitriz> present+
23:19:25 <markus_sabadello> drummond: manu did a great job describing this. Anyone have objections to this?
23:19:46 <brent> Topic: Issue status check
23:19:55 <brent> https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues?q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+sort%3Aupdated-asc
23:20:27 <markus_sabadello> brent: We'll start at the top and go over this list.
23:20:33 <brent> https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues/98
23:20:56 <brent> scribe+ brent
23:21:23 <brent> markus_sabadello: issue was raised about syntax of DIDs, specifically the use of multiple colons
23:21:47 <brent> ... there are some methods that use additional colons to identify subnets or specific ledgers.
23:22:13 <brent> ... these additional colons are for method specific identifiers, but that wasn't clear.
23:22:41 <brent> markus_sabadello: I think the issue could be closed with no changes
23:23:03 <brent> https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues/75
23:23:30 <dbuc> I am muted
23:23:35 <dbuc> can someone unmute me?
23:24:00 <markus_sabadello> dbuc: Just commented on this, this is related to issue 14.
23:24:18 <markus_sabadello> dbuc: In that issue, I think we agreed that we will not do anything to retain revoked keys.
23:24:19 <JoeAndrieu_> q+
23:24:35 <markus_sabadello> dbuc: So I just commented that if we agreed to not standardize this, it doesn't apply in this issue.
23:25:29 <brent> ack JoeAndrieu_
23:25:35 <markus_sabadello> JoeAndrieu_: The consensus we had was not what dbuc thinks, I'll try to unpack that in the issue.
23:25:36 <brent> https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues/118
23:26:16 <brent> https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues/53
23:26:43 <markus_sabadello> manu: This one needs a PR, ivan split this issue into two different issues.
23:26:50 <dbuc> JoeAndrieu_: Didn't see the one sentence bit that talks about allowing an endlessly growing key list
23:26:56 <markus_sabadello> manu: Will make a comment to that effect in the issue
23:27:01 <brent> https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues/140
23:27:11 <dbuc> I will reply with some thoughts
23:27:12 <Orie> please close
23:27:31 <Orie> :party: :)
23:27:45 <markus_sabadello> drummond: I wrote a comment that I propose to close this, based on the consensus we had during the F2F about multiple representations.
23:27:59 <brent> https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues/134
23:28:20 <markus_sabadello> brent: Amy is not here, anyone else wants to comment?
23:28:51 <markus_sabadello> q+
23:29:14 <markus_sabadello> manu: This should be normative, id is mandatory
23:29:21 <brent> ack markus_sabadello
23:29:58 <brent> markus_sabadello: i believe we made ids optional
23:30:07 <brent> manu: not for keys, that would be dangerous
23:30:29 <brent> markus_sabadello: it is still optional
23:30:53 <brent> https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues/70
23:31:43 <markus_sabadello> dbuc: This has now spanned across multiple DID methods that have a propagation delay
23:32:02 <markus_sabadello> dbuc: Most DID methods in the method-specific-id have a truncated identifier
23:32:19 <markus_sabadello> dbuc: Sometimes you have to wait until a DID is propagated, before it can be resolved
23:32:42 <markus_sabadello> dbuc: So we need a way to pass the initial value as part of the identifier
23:32:47 <JoeAndrieu_> q+ to mention did:ethr keys have no delay
23:32:51 <markus_sabadello> dbuc: We wanted this to be a generic matrix parameter
23:32:55 <markus_sabadello> q+
23:32:58 <brent> ack: JoeAndrieu_
23:33:29 <markus_sabadello> JoeAndrieu_: Thank you for pointing to the use case. Some ledger-based DIDs can be used immediately (such as did:ethr)
23:33:58 <markus_sabadello> dbuc: For some DID methods, the identifier IS the value
23:34:29 <markus_sabadello> dbuc: Any DID method that wants a verbose DID document associated with an initial state, or wants rotation, have this need
23:34:32 <JoeAndrieu_> q?
23:35:11 <markus_sabadello> dbuc: At this point, I have no way to use my DIDs without waiting for several minutes
23:35:16 <brent> ack JoeAndrieu_
23:35:16 <Zakim> JoeAndrieu_, you wanted to mention did:ethr keys have no delay
23:35:21 <markus_sabadello> JoeAndrieu_: Maybe this is a shortcoming of the method design
23:35:25 <brent> ack markus_sabadello
23:35:28 <dbuc> Design a better method would require me literally breaking the laws of physics
23:35:40 <kdenhartog> q+
23:35:52 <Orie> q+
23:35:56 <brent> ack kdenhartog
23:35:57 <dbuc> I mean, I think I am pretty good and coming up with cool stuff, but breaking the laws of physics is a toughy
23:36:28 <brent> q?
23:36:38 <dbuc> I do not appreciate folks suggesting that this has anything to do with the DID Method being crappy or having some failing
23:36:48 <manu> scribe+ manu
23:37:07 <manu> kdenhartog: Let's resolve matrix parameters before discussing this one.
23:37:11 <Orie> q-
23:37:12 <manu> brent: Let's have the discussion in the issue.
23:37:35 <markus_sabadello> +1 to kdenhartog , this has a dependency on the matrix parameters discussion
23:37:54 <brent> https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues/72
23:37:55 <dbuc> I will just close the darn issue and use a URL param
23:37:57 <dbuc> yep
23:38:18 <manu> brent: drummond, status?
23:38:25 <dbuc> don't want to deal with it anymore, so I will just let others run face first into this when they inevitably hit it
23:38:27 <manu> drummond: This should be done, this is ready for PR
23:39:04 <manu> drummond: I'll update the issue
23:39:22 <brent> https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues/45
23:39:22 <manu> drummond: Can I break protocol?
23:39:26 <manu> brent: I will allow that.
23:40:22 <manu> drummond: Issue 45 - I think Andrew makes a good point, need to look at it a bit more closely, will ask Markus to look, if Markus is ok with it, we can get this into a PR
23:40:50 <brent> https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues/122
23:42:10 <manu> JoeAndrieu_: It's not clear where we ended up - we need amy to clarify what she was trying to get at, much of the conversation was discussing something that wasn't the primary issue.
23:42:49 <brent> https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues/137
23:42:51 <markus_sabadello> scribe: markus_sabadello
23:43:14 <markus_sabadello> manu: I tried to re-assign it to markus_sabadello , but Github's API was down
23:43:22 <markus_sabadello> i agree :)
23:43:48 <brent> markus_sabadello: this status depends on another issue
23:43:59 <Orie> markus_sabadello: this issue depends on the other issue, which is if matrix params should be removed
23:44:10 <brent> ... I worked on a document to describe use cases for matrix parameters
23:44:18 <JoeAndrieu_> q+
23:44:57 <brent> .. I think the next step, if we should remove them, is to describe how the use cases can be done without matirx parameters
23:45:20 <brent> ack JoeAndrieu_
23:45:39 <markus_sabadello> JoeAndrieu_: I interpreted the F2F homework differently, my understanding was that there was one use case (hierarchical portability)
23:45:48 <markus_sabadello> JoeAndrieu_: I think dbuc's use case needs to be considered
23:45:56 <markus_sabadello> JoeAndrieu_: There are also considerations around versions
23:46:04 <markus_sabadello> JoeAndrieu_: There may be other use cases
23:46:15 <markus_sabadello> JoeAndrieu_: Not sure if Markus' document is the right place to collect them all
23:46:32 <brent> q?
23:46:34 <markus_sabadello> JoeAndrieu_: If you have a use case that you think depends on matrix/query parameters, please create an issue so we can discuss it
23:46:53 <brent> https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues/131
23:47:22 <manu> q+
23:47:29 <brent> ack manu
23:47:44 <markus_sabadello> manu: We need both, because the "id" for the verification method is not the same as the "id" for the key
23:48:00 <markus_sabadello> manu: We should not conflate "kid" with "id", I expect a lively debate on that
23:48:18 <brent> https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues/9
23:49:17 <markus_sabadello> manu: Probably the spec should not say anything about how you protect the DID document, this is out of scope
23:49:23 <markus_sabadello> manu: Will add a comment to the issue
23:50:04 <brent> https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues/58
23:50:36 <jonathan_holt> present+ jonathan_holt
23:51:01 <markus_sabadello> JoeAndrieu_: The CCG hasn't updated its formal process to deal with registries yet. Intention is to have a light-weight process
23:51:17 <markus_sabadello> JoeAndrieu_: We haven't yet organized/document the process
23:51:23 <markus_sabadello> JoeAndrieu_: Will add a comment
23:51:44 <Orie> q+
23:51:59 <markus_sabadello> JoeAndrieu_: This is related to the DID WG registry process
23:52:41 <markus_sabadello> brent: This is specifically related to the DID method registry and LD cryptographic suite registry, not necessarily related to the DID WG extensibility registry
23:52:42 <Orie> q-
23:52:44 <brent> ack Orie
23:52:46 <Orie> nvm
23:53:00 <brent> https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues/10
23:53:15 <markus_sabadello> manu: Same comments apply as to the last issue
23:53:23 <brent> https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues/8
23:53:54 <markus_sabadello> manu: This needs more discussion from the group, we should schedule time to talk about this
23:53:58 <markus_sabadello> brent: Agree
23:54:11 <brent> https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues/188
23:54:14 <justin_r> agree that dedicated time for crypto suites is going to be important
23:54:55 <markus_sabadello> Orie: Right now, we have the DID Core registry (for interop concepts), we have JSON-LD contexts in the DID Core repo
23:55:10 <markus_sabadello> Orie: How do we have a place where we can update the JSON-LD context so that documents are actually compliant
23:55:41 <markus_sabadello> Orie: My proposal is to host JSON-LD contexts together with JSON schemas in the DID Core repo. This way we have all machine-readable document in one place, as opposed to having things in different repos.
23:55:47 <manu> q+
23:56:05 <brent> ack manu
23:56:05 <markus_sabadello> Orie: Pretty much every issue related to JSON-LD is blocked by this. Might be best to have a standalone call to address this
23:56:16 <markus_sabadello> manu: +1 to what Orie said. We need to make a decision about this.
23:56:26 <Orie> related: https://github.com/w3c/did-core-registry/issues/3
23:56:38 <markus_sabadello> manu: This also related to our context strategy / caching strategy. It would be best if the chairs can schedule a call for this
23:56:42 <markus_sabadello> manu: Will add a comment
23:57:04 <brent> https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues/16
23:58:06 <gannan> gannan has joined #did
23:58:13 <markus_sabadello> kdenhartog: Last time I thought about this I may have been wrong. Based on the discussion, we may be able to close this.
23:58:26 <markus_sabadello> brent: If you like you can add a comment saying that this is resolved
23:58:38 <markus_sabadello> kdenhartog: Can you assign this to me please
23:58:44 <markus_sabadello> brent: You are assigned
23:59:23 <markus_sabadello> brent: We will continue this process in future meetings, thank you for coming
23:59:42 <markus_sabadello> brent: Make your comments throughout the week, thanks everybody
23:59:46 <Orie> thanks!
00:00:06 <manu> rrsagent, draft minutes
00:00:06 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2020/02/25-did-minutes.html manu
00:00:20 <brent> zakim, this id did
00:00:20 <Zakim> I don't understand 'this id did', brent
00:00:28 <brent> rrsagent, make minutes
00:00:28 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2020/02/25-did-minutes.html brent
00:00:46 <manu> present+ sumita
00:00:49 <manu> present+ markus
00:01:09 <brent> zakim, who is here
00:01:09 <Zakim> brent, you need to end that query with '?'
00:01:13 <brent> zakim, who is here?
00:01:13 <Zakim> Present: brent, justin_r, JoeAndrieu, Orie, kdenhartog, manu, drummond, dmitriz, jonathan_holt, sumita, markus
00:01:15 <Zakim> On IRC I see gannan, dmitriz, JoeAndrieu_, dbuc, jingxuan, Orie, markus_sabadello, brent, Zakim, RRSAgent, jonathan_holt, tzviya, dlehn, llorllale, manu, dlongley, Travis,
00:01:15 <Zakim> ... bigbluehat, jfishback, ChristopherA, deiu, wayne, rhiaro, hadleybeeman, yancy
00:01:49 <manu> present+  jingxuan, dbuc, dmitriz
00:01:52 <manu> rrsagent, draft minutes
00:01:52 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2020/02/25-did-minutes.html manu
01:19:02 <gannan> gannan has joined #did
01:46:57 <dmitriz> dmitriz has joined #did
02:17:30 <Zakim> Zakim has left #did
02:24:44 <gannan> gannan has joined #did