22:00:05 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #did
22:00:05 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2021/05/25-did-irc
22:00:16 <justin_r> justin_r has joined #did
22:00:31 <brent> zakim, this is did
22:00:31 <Zakim> got it, brent
22:01:06 <brent> rrsagent, make logs public
22:01:12 <brent> chair: brent
22:01:32 <brent> Meeting: Decentralized Identifier Working Group
22:01:34 <markus_sabadello> markus_sabadello has joined #did
22:01:48 <justin_r> present+
22:01:49 <brent> Agenda: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-did-wg/2021May/0016.html
22:01:51 <shigeya> present+
22:02:00 <brent> present+
22:02:11 <brent> present+ burn
22:02:35 <markus_sabadello> present+
22:02:47 <agropper> agropper has joined #did
22:02:48 <selfissued> selfissued has joined #did
22:02:55 <agropper> present+
22:02:57 <selfissued> present+
22:04:30 <manu> present+
22:04:55 <drummond> drummond has joined #did
22:05:05 <drummond> present+
22:05:09 <drummond> scribe+
22:05:52 <drummond> brent: Agenda review
22:06:15 <drummond> ...special topic call, implementation feedback, testing status, MIME types, DID Core issues and PRs
22:07:08 <drummond> ...Special topic call: we may or may not have one depending on the outcome today. If we have one, it will be Thursday at noon ET.
22:07:18 <brent> Topic: Status of Implementation Feedback
22:07:23 <manu> q+
22:07:36 <brent> ack manu
22:07:57 <drummond> manu: shared screen of implementation report
22:08:26 <drummond> ...Shigeya has done a great job of providing a report
22:08:58 <drummond> ...various DID methods are passing the "valid id property" test today.
22:09:28 <drummond> ...currently there are 150 tests all of which have to be checked manually
22:10:05 <shigeya> Yes, I'm working on summary part of the report.
22:10:10 <drummond> ...we currently have enough implementations of versionid
22:10:38 <drummond> ...but hl and service parameters have not been implemented yet
22:10:47 <drummond> ...these could be cut from the spec
22:11:08 <drummond> ...removing hashlink could be removed without a new CR
22:11:27 <drummond> ...but service and relativeRef are not marked as at-risk
22:11:51 <drummond> ....we do really well elsewhere until we get to the JSON tests
22:12:23 <justin_r> imho, if we drop these from the data model that will be one of the stupidest decisions this group could make :P
22:12:37 <drummond> ...the data model has all the different data types and they will likely stay even if there are no implementations in JSON
22:13:08 <drummond> selfissued: Having booleans and numbers should not be controversial.
22:13:21 <drummond> manu: Agreed. We just need a resolution supporting them.
22:13:52 <drummond> ...when we get into DID resolution and dereferencing, it gets thin.
22:14:12 <drummond> ...most of the tests are fulfilled only by the Universal Resolver and Ceramic.
22:15:40 <drummond> ...is the Universal Resolver going to implement those?
22:15:46 <drummond> markus_sabadello: Yes, a new PR is coming
22:16:41 <drummond> manu: there were 2 other features that were concerning: canonicalID and equivalentID
22:17:15 <drummond> justin_r: Not sure about SecureKey using equivalentID and canonicalID, but they do use service
22:17:43 <drummond> orie: Manu is showing a local version
22:18:10 <drummond> manu: Hopefully if we get ION and SecureKey in, then we'll have coverage of those properties
22:18:24 <drummond> justin_r: Do I have an action item for that?
22:19:39 <Orie_> Orie_ has joined #did
22:19:48 <Orie_> https://github.com/w3c/did-test-suite/blob/main/packages/did-core-test-server/suites/implementations/did-orb.json#L166
22:19:53 <drummond> manu: looks like a bug in the test suite
22:19:57 <Orie_> https://github.com/w3c/did-test-suite/blob/main/packages/did-core-test-server/suites/implementations/did-orb.json#L146
22:20:10 <Orie_> ^ including examples of cannonical / equivalent and service.
22:20:34 <shigeya> Maybe missing from `default.js` ?
22:20:35 <drummond> manu: The only concern should be with service and relativeRef.
22:20:38 <brent> q?
22:20:42 <brent> q+
22:20:57 <drummond> ...hopefully that's not a big problem because we just need implementators to submit their examples.
22:21:20 <drummond> ...so we should go for another week. In the meantime, the pressure is on Markus to get the Universal Resolver in...
22:21:35 <drummond> ...and for those working on the test suite to see why some results are not showing up
22:21:54 <drummond> Orie_:  We should also be sure the CR system is generating the right report
22:22:14 <drummond> manu: We are not longer checking in the report
22:22:25 <brent> ack brent
22:22:32 <drummond> ...and the CI system no longer works the way it did before
22:22:54 <drummond> brent: What are our options going forward? We have asked implementators to submit.
22:22:58 <manu> q+
22:23:20 <brent> ack manu
22:23:32 <drummond> ...we understand there are implementations supporting the service property, but are there any alternatives such as affadavits?
22:24:23 <drummond> manu: 3 options. 1) people implementation. 2) Affadavits of promising to use it, such as with JSON data model., and 3) remove from spec which forces us into another CR which will take 3-4 weeks minimum.
22:24:50 <drummond> ...the best option right now is identifying implementators and having them speed up
22:25:15 <shigeya> q+
22:25:16 <Orie_> https://github.com/w3c/did-test-suite/pulls
22:25:20 <drummond> brent: we can take a few more mins to discuss if needed
22:25:22 <Orie_> ^ there are a lot of open PRs
22:25:22 <brent> ack shigeya
22:25:23 <shigeya> https://github.com/w3c/did-test-suite/issues/132
22:25:53 <drummond> shigeya: I created a new issue about descriptive text for implementations.
22:26:14 <manu> q+
22:26:18 <drummond> ...we may need to ask implementators to update their descriptive text.
22:26:19 <brent> ack manu
22:26:41 <drummond> manu: question for Shigeya: what is the description for?
22:27:48 <drummond> shigeya: There are inconsistent uses of the summaries of the tests in the report.
22:28:07 <drummond> ...that would better categorize the outputs of the reporting tool
22:28:25 <markus_sabadello> q+
22:28:26 <drummond> manu: I think that's something that the test suite curators can add as metadata
22:28:35 <brent> ack markus_sabadello
22:29:04 <manu> q+
22:29:11 <drummond> markus_sabadello: For the Universal Resolver, we are including the file name but we could include the name inside the test submission
22:29:22 <brent> ack manu
22:29:42 <markus_sabadello> q+
22:29:53 <drummond> manu: The Universal Resolver is submitting DID methods that you didn't author, but you are submitting requests for multiple other live DID methods.
22:30:13 <brent> ack markus_sabadello
22:30:15 <drummond> markus_sabadello: It depends somewhat on the DID method type and how it is implemented.
22:30:45 <drummond> ...most of the time it is a Docker container that is running code from the DID method authors
22:31:02 <drummond> ...so in that case, the Universal Resolver is running different code
22:31:06 <drummond> q+
22:31:40 <drummond> manu: I would say it meets the bar for an independent implementation. Does anyone object?
22:31:45 <brent> ack drummond
22:31:57 <markus_sabadello> q+
22:31:59 <brent> scribe+
22:32:15 <brent> drummond: I agree with manu, those are separate implementations
22:32:19 <brent> ack markus_sabadello
22:32:52 <manu> q+ to note when we need to be careful about this.
22:33:03 <drummond> markus_sabadello: Ironically this sometimes could mean that for certain DID methods the Universal Resolver could be resolving through different resolution paths.
22:33:14 <brent> ack manu
22:33:14 <Zakim> manu, you wanted to note when we need to be careful about this.
22:33:21 <drummond> ...so those might not be considered two implementations.
22:33:53 <drummond> manu: The only time we need to be careful about this is when we have a normative statement with only two implementations and one of them is the Universal Resolver.
22:34:27 <drummond> ...for example where a test shows only the Universal resolver and Ceramic may be suspect
22:34:28 <brent> Topic: MIME Types
22:34:31 <drummond> ...but we will check that
22:35:02 <drummond> brent: We have an IANA Considerations section in DID Core
22:35:36 <drummond> ...and we specify MIME types there that we have had issues getting registered with IANA due to containing two plus signs
22:35:59 <drummond> ...option #1: remove all media types from spec and hope there is no impact
22:36:23 <drummond> ...option #2: we only register did+json
22:36:35 <manu> q+
22:36:39 <selfissued> q+
22:36:42 <brent> ack manu
22:36:55 <drummond> ...option 3: only register one MIME type and write IANA
22:37:16 <drummond> manu: We haven't sent IANA a "we really need you to act" email
22:37:22 <brent> ack selfissued
22:37:23 <drummond> ...I will avoid saying anything else
22:37:30 <manu> q+ to argue for something.
22:37:50 <drummond> selfissued: Normally when you ask IANA to register and there's a problem, the experts say what to do
22:37:57 <manu> q+ to note what they asked us to do.
22:38:08 <brent> ack manu
22:38:08 <Zakim> manu, you wanted to argue for something. and to note what they asked us to do.
22:38:20 <drummond> ...the double plus issue is understandable - with the JWT work we changed one plus to a dash
22:38:27 <drummond> ...why aren't we doing that
22:39:03 <drummond> manu: IANA asked us to write up a spec proposing support for two plus signs
22:39:08 <drummond> ...we wrote up that spec a year ago
22:39:18 <drummond> ...there was a robust mailing list discussion
22:39:28 <drummond> ...but then it died down and there was no decision
22:39:39 <drummond> ...even though the feedback was mostly positive
22:40:01 <drummond> ...and ironically the feedback was that a spec was not really needed to register
22:40:07 <drummond> ...so we have a couple options
22:40:21 <drummond> ...first we could go back and just ask to register, pointing to the past experience
22:41:06 <drummond> ...RE "why aren't we changing one plus to a dash", the JSON-LD MIME type already has a plus, so JSON processors would not recognize it if that was changed.
22:41:31 <drummond> selfissued: The way to force the hand in the IETF process, we just ask for a preliminary registration
22:41:39 <drummond> ...either they will register it or they won't
22:41:47 <drummond> ...if they register it, we're done
22:41:53 <drummond> ...if not, then we can appeal
22:42:07 <drummond> ...and ask for full registration
22:42:51 <drummond> manu: Ok, we will go forward with that approach, which means we don't change anything in the spec
22:43:35 <drummond> selfissued: In the comments, explain what happened, citing the spec you wrote, and say, "W3C as a cooperative standards org requests your help in resolving this".
22:43:42 <drummond> manu: Ok, we'll do that.
22:43:59 <drummond> brent: Good. Thanks Mike for the input.
22:44:09 <drummond> ...any other input about MIME types?
22:44:28 <brent> Topic: DID Core issues and PRs
22:44:41 <drummond> ...based on those last two topics, we will NOT have a special topic call this week.
22:44:42 <brent> https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues?q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+sort%3Aupdated-asc+-label%3Adefer-v2
22:45:12 <drummond> ...my hope as we go through these, my hope is we can get volunteers
22:45:54 <brent> subtopic: @issue 728
22:46:04 <drummond> manu: some of the PRs have turned into challenges even though they are all editorial
22:46:19 <drummond> ....so it may take some back-and-forth on each of these
22:46:45 <drummond> ...if you have concerns with the language, please make concrete recommendations on new language
22:46:52 <brent> subtopic: Diagrams need SVG and detailed description @issue 625
22:46:59 <drummond> ...using the GitHub change tool would help the most
22:47:19 <drummond> markus_sabadello: I should have done this much sooner. So far I haven't been able to.
22:47:38 <drummond> I did the diagrams with an OpenOffice app, but I can't get them converted to SVG.
22:48:03 <shigeya> Please let me know exportable formats, then I may help.
22:48:35 <drummond> brent: if folks can help, please offer
22:48:57 <brent> subtopic: verification method IDs MUST contain a fragment @issue 708
22:48:58 <drummond> markus_sabadello: Thanks, Shigeya, I will share my source docs and ask for help
22:49:40 <drummond> manu: George Aristy from SecureKey would like to have normative statements about the structure of DID URLs
22:50:01 <drummond> ...but I don't know as the WG could agree on anything more than a valid URI
22:50:15 <drummond> ...however it would be worth a call with George to understand
22:50:42 <brent> subtopic: @issue 719
22:51:19 <brent> PR that addresses this: https://github.com/w3c/did-core/pull/754
22:51:49 <brent> subtopic: Examples might be out of date @issue 734
22:51:54 <Orie_> q+
22:52:00 <drummond> drummond: I submitted PRs on that and the next issue; they just need review
22:52:18 <brent> PR for this issue: https://github.com/w3c/did-core/pull/748
22:52:20 <drummond> Orie_: I removed the Ethereum address example
22:52:23 <brent> ack Orie_
22:52:43 <drummond> ...there is still a potential issue with having a public key multibase example first
22:53:01 <drummond> ...so I hoped that providing several examples would solve the problem
22:53:16 <drummond> brent: a link to the PR is in IRC so please review
22:53:26 <brent> subtopic: When is the DID URI getting constructed @issue 729
22:53:43 <drummond> manu: this just requires me to write some text
22:54:15 <drummond> ...if someone else wants to take a look at that, please do
22:54:25 <brent> subtopic: Proving Control sections are wrong @issue 583
22:54:55 <drummond> manu: The PR is in and has been merged, and I am waiting for Amy to see if it addressed her concern
22:55:07 <drummond> brent: There are currently 15 open PRs that are all editorial
22:55:26 <drummond> ...I encourage WG members to go in and review and approve (or improve)
22:55:44 <drummond> ...the editors rely on our review to know when they can go forward with a merge
22:55:57 <drummond> ...thank you everyone for your hard work; it is a pleasure to work with you
22:56:03 <drummond> ...NO SPECIAL TOPIC CALL this week
22:56:10 <drummond> ...next meeting is June 1
22:56:30 <brent> zakim, who is here?
22:56:30 <Zakim> Present: justin_r, shigeya, brent, burn, markus_sabadello, agropper, selfissued, manu, drummond
22:56:33 <Zakim> On IRC I see Orie_, drummond, selfissued, agropper, markus_sabadello, RRSAgent, Zakim, TallTed, brent, tzviya, dlehn2, faceface, Travis_, dlongley, manu, bigbluehat, hadleybeeman,
22:56:33 <Zakim> ... cel, rhiaro, wayne, shigeya, ChristopherA
22:56:43 <TallTed> present+
22:57:12 <brent> zakim, end the meeting
22:57:12 <Zakim> As of this point the attendees have been justin_r, shigeya, brent, burn, markus_sabadello, agropper, selfissued, manu, drummond, TallTed
22:57:14 <Zakim> RRSAgent, please draft minutes
22:57:14 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2021/05/25-did-minutes.html Zakim
22:57:18 <Zakim> I am happy to have been of service, brent; please remember to excuse RRSAgent.  Goodbye
22:57:22 <Zakim> Zakim has left #did
22:57:25 <brent> rrsagent, bye
22:57:25 <RRSAgent> I see no action items