21:53:25 RRSAgent has joined #did 21:53:25 logging to https://www.w3.org/2021/07/27-did-irc 21:54:41 brent has changed the topic to: DID WG Meeting Agenda 2021-07-27: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-did-wg/2021Jul/0023.html 21:54:53 rrsagent, draft minutes 21:54:53 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2021/07/27-did-minutes.html brent 21:55:01 rrsagent, make logs public 21:55:17 Meeting: Decentralized Identifier Working Group 21:55:25 Chair: Brent Zundel 21:55:28 justin_r has joined #did 21:55:31 Agenda: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-did-wg/2021Jul/0023.html 21:55:41 zakim, this is did 21:55:41 got it, brent 21:55:52 present+ 21:57:07 shigeya has joined #did 22:02:02 markus_sabadello has joined #did 22:02:18 present+ 22:02:25 present+ 22:03:11 scribe+ 22:03:13 present+ 22:04:08 brent: Let's begin by reviewing agenda, topics for today -- solicit content for press release, give notice for Proposed Rec publication date, spend bulk of meeting on DID Spec registries, then talk about other notes and their progress and how we can move them forward 22:04:21 brent: any questions on agenda or that they'd like to add/change about agenda? 22:04:31 No changes. 22:04:48 present+ 22:04:52 Topic: Content for a Press Release 22:05:37 brent: W3C would like us to do a press release around DID spec and it's official upcoming ratification... they'd like to know about massive deployments, other standards groups using DIDs, any companies that use this stuff and like it... that is information we're looking for. 22:05:40 https://www.w3.org/2021/06/pressrelease-webaudio.html.en 22:05:48 https://www.w3.org/2021/01/pressrelease-webrtc-rec.html.en 22:05:51 brent: if folks are curious, there are a couple of useful press releases above ^^. 22:06:05 Orie_ has joined #did 22:06:07 present+ 22:06:09 q+ 22:06:12 brent: If anyone has any statement they want to make, please reach out to the Chairs so we can forward comments on to the right people. Any questions? 22:06:17 ack Orie_ 22:07:04 Topic: PR publication date 22:08:01 brent: This is just a notification to the group, when we proposed to transition to Recommendation, we included a date of July 30th and due to practical impossibilities, that date isn't going to happen. The new date we're shooting for is August 3rd 2021, the resolution stands, we don't need to redo the proposal. Just informing folks that the content is in a new place. 22:08:13 q+ 22:08:20 ack manu 22:08:49 manu: I put content in both places so no matter where anyone looks, it'll be there. 22:09:19 brent: We have received no objections to the proposal to go to Proposed Rec... no objections, no opposition to document, we are moving forward to Proposed Recommendation. We are done with our part, we're passing it on to the W3C Process. 22:09:21 Topic: DID Spec Registries 22:09:59 brent: This is going to form the bulk of our conversation today -- the last time we spoke, there were a couple of resolutions that haven't been acted upon, I believe those have been addressed at this point... there are a number of issues in registries that are open, let's go through them. 22:10:15 brent: we can also go in another direction if folks want. 22:10:24 https://github.com/w3c/did-spec-registries/issues 22:10:36 q+ 22:10:37 brent: There is the link to registry issues ^^ just going to start at the top 22:10:47 ack Orie_ 22:10:50 brent: We'll do a best effort processing... 22:11:06 Orie: When is drop dead date for press quotes? 22:11:24 q+ to suggest better order of action https://github.com/w3c/did-spec-registries/issues?q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+sort%3Aupdated-asc 22:11:41 brent: We have a good month or a bit more... but sooner the better. DIF is working on a press quote. 22:11:43 ack TallTed 22:11:43 TallTed, you wanted to suggest better order of action https://github.com/w3c/did-spec-registries/issues?q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+sort%3Aupdated-asc 22:11:55 TallTed: Can we do better order of action? 22:12:07 brent: no problem, let's do that. 22:12:27 q+ 22:12:28 brent: Let's start w/ 16... 22:13:08 subtopic: https://github.com/w3c/did-spec-registries/issues/16 @issue did-spec-registries 16 22:13:29 brent: Orie, what needs to happen here? 22:14:11 Orie: I think this comes from an era where we were managing a lot of JSON-LD changes... people were submitting JSON-LD contexts, one small break breaks it for everyone.... CI pipeline had added checks to prevent that from happening... we've changed the way DID Core handles JSON-LD contexts. 22:14:32 +1 close, overtaken by events 22:14:48 Orie: We removed all term definitions not in DID Core... you're using a separate context file for extra suites/terms... protection for DID Spec Registries is lighter... linting HTML file... recommend closing this issue. We're no longer taking PRs into structured data objects. 22:14:53 manu: +1 to close 22:15:30 subtopic: https://github.com/w3c/did-spec-registries/issues/7 @issue did-spec-registries 7 22:15:49 Orie: I don't think we need this anymore, not relying on JSON Schema in any way. 22:16:32 Orie: This is one of the benefits and drawbacks of using schemas -- what if we make the registry really powerful wrt. data model... we've moved away from that, moved away from schema languages, will leave a comment to that effect. 22:16:37 manu: +1 to close 22:16:41 q+ 22:16:44 ack Orie 22:16:52 ack markus_sabadello 22:17:39 markus_sabadello: I think when we removed CDDL, there could be other things for DID Core, that might be stable, but extensions are hard to maintain... just saying that we are not completely moving away from validating data model, but as far as extensions, I think we can close it. 22:18:10 subtopic: https://github.com/w3c/did-spec-registries/issues/17 @issue did-spec-registries 17 22:18:17 q+ 22:18:22 ack Orie_ 22:19:11 Orie: We did this, but the DID core test suite, if you look at context examples, there is community consensus on how to version contexts wrt. DID Documents including DID Core context.... and then there are community ones, date stamped, versioned... I think we should close this issue and point to examples in DID Core test suite. 22:20:01 manu: +1 to close 22:20:13 subtopic: https://github.com/w3c/did-spec-registries/issues/ @issue did-spec-registries 9 22:20:18 subtopic: https://github.com/w3c/did-spec-registries/issues/9 @issue did-spec-registries 9 22:20:21 q+ 22:20:27 ack Orie_ 22:21:25 Orie: I believe we resolved this as well, we re-structured the way the registry defines terms in DID Core, the way the registry lists properties of the abstract data model, properties of representaions, properties of extensions are all defined in DID Spec registries... I think this is done, however, we did spend a lot of time talking about this particular issue. I wonder if folks are happy w/ the way things ended up. 22:22:06 Orie: Either issue should be closed because we made necessary adjustements, or concrete proposal to say how it should change to do something different (and accomplish same task) 22:22:21 manu: +1 to close and say new issue for new suggestions 22:22:51 Closed issue 9. 22:22:58 subtopic: https://github.com/w3c/did-spec-registries/issues/41 @issue did-spec-registries 41 22:23:28 brent: As of #47, all OCAP properties have been removed or are defined 22:23:34 manu: +1 to close 22:23:39 Issue 41 closed. 22:23:49 subtopic: https://github.com/w3c/did-spec-registries/issues/13 @issue did-spec-registries 13 22:24:07 q+ 22:24:13 ack manu 22:24:19 scribe+ 22:24:41 manu: the only 2 things that have not been checked, have been moved out of did core. 22:24:51 ... the redirects have also been addressed 22:25:09 ... there was a proposal... 22:25:13 q+ 22:25:21 ack Orie_ 22:26:25 Orie: We may have to look at the ns page vs. the registry... we should put those links at the bottom of this issue and close it and then get more approval/review on how we ended up solving this at the top level... maybe folks don't agree with ns system? I don't think folks agree with what happened here. 22:26:34 https://www.w3.org/ns/did 22:26:43 q+ 22:26:48 ack manu 22:27:03 https://www.w3.org/TR/did-core/ 22:27:37 https://www.w3.org/TR/did-spec-registries/ 22:27:58 manu: We need to open a new issue to get a review on https://www.w3.org/ns/did 22:28:04 q+ 22:28:20 ack manu 22:28:40 manu: Please open it on did-spec-registries. 22:29:00 Orie: i'll open it, please assign reviewers. 22:29:14 brent: Any opposition to close this issue as long as we track the review in a separate issue? 22:29:33 Issue 13 is closed. 22:29:40 (No objections to closing) 22:29:41 Opened as https://github.com/w3c/did-spec-registries/issues/322 22:30:01 subtopic: https://github.com/w3c/did-spec-registries/issues/77 @issue did-spec-registries 77 22:30:08 q+ 22:30:13 ack manu 22:31:07 manu: i'm happy to close this, although it would be nice to understand usage of properties. 22:31:18 q+ 22:31:24 ack manu 22:33:14 Orie: We should add navigation to DID Test Suite 22:33:58 manu: We can do that using useful links in respec. 22:34:03 brent: Let's add an issue 22:34:09 CLosing issue 77. 22:34:16 Orie is adding the issue. 22:34:21 subtopic: https://github.com/w3c/did-spec-registries/issues/66 @issue did-spec-registries 66 22:34:37 q+ 22:34:46 ack markus_sabadello 22:35:08 markus_sabadello: Quick correction, assigned to Oliver... this is an extension, DID URL parameter, has been added to registries... probably we can close this since it's been added. 22:35:23 Closed issue 66. 22:35:39 subtopic: https://github.com/w3c/did-spec-registries/issues/94 @issue did-spec-registries 94 22:36:25 Orie: I feel like I should withdraw did:github, we have did:web now... I kinda don't want to remove it, but I don't want to get us in trouble. 22:37:13 brent: We have created the registry to register extensions, to date I'm not aware of any opposition from Microsoft on did:github, I think that opposition would need to appear before we act to remove the DID Method unless the author of the DID Method wishes to pre-emptively do so. 22:37:39 subtopic: https://github.com/w3c/did-spec-registries/issues/93 @issue did-spec-registries 93 22:38:12 Orie: We did make some improvements to this, added PR that improved warning at front about this. 22:38:45 Orie: Under registration process... use must be authorized for copyrighted stuff, addition cannot create unreasonable moral, privacy, copyright, trademark issues. 22:38:53 Orie: I suggest we should close this issue as process has been updated. 22:38:57 manu: +1 to close 22:39:09 brent: any opposition to closing issue? 22:39:17 No opposition. 22:39:19 Issue 93 closed. 22:39:25 subtopic: https://github.com/w3c/did-spec-registries/issues/91 @issue did-spec-registries 91 22:39:38 q+ 22:40:31 ack markus_sabadello 22:40:31 Orie: To date, no one has volunteered to audit 103+ DID Methods in registry... would be a sparse field... don't have much detail... most of registered methods have barely met registration methods, privacy/security sections existing or more than a section or two existing... This should be closed. I don't think folks are going to want to do this. 22:40:35 manu: +1 to closing. 22:41:12 markus_sabadello: One thing that could be done... add a column for "Evaluation of DID Rubrics"... scope of Rubric has expanded, covers security aspects... links to evaluations of DID Rubric, but Orie is right... will anyone do that? 22:41:54 brent: My $0.02, this sounds like a great thing for interested folks to add to a maintenance group, but DID Spec Registries will probably be fine w/o column for 3rd party Rubric audits. 22:42:13 brent: My recommendation is that we close it, is anyone opposed? Alternatively, we could label it as defer. 22:42:52 No objections. 22:42:55 Closing 91. 22:42:57 subtopic: https://github.com/w3c/did-spec-registries/issues/81 @issue did-spec-registries 81 22:43:39 Orie: We should close this due to lack of feedback. 22:43:41 q+ 22:44:09 ack manu 22:44:33 manu: Didn't we do some variation of this? We do have a registration procedure that people should follow, right? And we oversee that? 22:44:48 brent: Hearing no opposition to closing this, we do have a registration procedure, close? 22:44:55 No objections. 22:45:11 Closing issue 81. 22:45:21 subtopic: https://github.com/w3c/did-spec-registries/issues/54 @issue did-spec-registries 54 22:45:41 Orie: I believe we did this. 22:45:51 https://w3c.github.io/did-spec-registries/#publickey 22:46:39 brent: Close 54? 22:46:49 No objections. 22:46:52 Issue 54 closed. 22:46:56 q+ 22:47:01 brent: Brief question -- keep going, or talk about other notes? 22:47:08 ack Orie_ 22:47:24 Orie: I'm not sure if we can have that conversation w/ this small group... would prefer a larger group setting... let's keep going on issues, make them go away. 22:47:38 brent: I'm fine with that objection, anyone else have an opinion? 22:47:41 manu: Keep going... 22:47:50 subtopic: https://github.com/w3c/did-spec-registries/issues/53 @issue did-spec-registries 53 22:48:07 markus_sabadello: This is done, I believe. 22:48:07 q+ 22:48:25 ack markus_sabadello 22:48:46 brent: Closing... 22:48:51 Issue 53 closed. 22:48:53 subtopic: https://github.com/w3c/did-spec-registries/issues/52 @issue did-spec-registries 52 22:49:31 Orie: At one point, at the beginning, DID Core discussed proofs, I think we've successfully removed the discussion from everything... I think we did this. 22:50:22 Seehttps://github.com/w3c/did-spec-registries/blob/main/vocabs/v1/context.jsonld 22:50:24 no proof 22:50:42 brent: Any opposition to closing? 22:50:48 brent: Seems this has been done. 22:51:07 Closed issue 52. 22:51:13 subtopic: https://github.com/w3c/did-spec-registries/issues/48 @issue did-spec-registries 48 22:51:24 q+ 22:51:29 ack manu 22:52:10 manu: I believe this is done... yes, it's done 22:52:18 Orie: This is done, see https://github.com/w3c/did-spec-registries/blob/main/vocabs/v1/context.jsonld 22:52:21 brent: opposition to close? 22:52:24 No opposition. 22:52:28 Issue 48 is closed. 22:52:39 subtopic: https://github.com/w3c/did-spec-registries/issues/105 @issue did-spec-registries 105 22:56:15 Orie: We addressed most of this... 22:56:53 brent: I'm going to leave 105 open for now... 22:57:07 brent: We can come back to it in the future... still work to be done there. 22:57:27 brent: We're going to close the meeting today... thanks to Ted for suggesting direction, we close a lot of issues today! 22:58:00 brent: What we went through today makes it clear that we still have work to do on registries before I'll be satisfied w/ them, look forward to more of this and more registries work. 22:58:12 closed 15, opened 2. good ratio 22:58:18 rrsagent, draft minutes 22:58:18 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2021/07/27-did-minutes.html manu 22:58:32 zakim, who is here? 22:58:32 Present: brent, markus_sabadello, shigeya, manu, TallTed, Orie_ 22:58:34 On IRC I see Orie_, shigeya, justin_r, RRSAgent, Zakim, brent, TallTed, dlehn3, dmitriz, etropea73101, faceface, Travis, dlongley, manu, hadleybeeman, bigbluehat, ChristopherA, 22:58:34 ... wayne, cel, rhiaro 22:58:51 present+ identitywoman 22:59:01 present+ agropper 22:59:48 zakim, end the meeting 22:59:48 As of this point the attendees have been brent, markus_sabadello, shigeya, manu, TallTed, Orie_, identitywoman, agropper 22:59:50 RRSAgent, please draft minutes 22:59:50 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2021/07/27-did-minutes.html Zakim 22:59:53 I am happy to have been of service, brent; please remember to excuse RRSAgent. Goodbye 22:59:57 Zakim has left #did 23:00:01 rrsagent, goodbye 23:00:01 I'm logging. I don't understand 'goodbye', brent. Try /msg RRSAgent help 23:00:09 rrsagent, please excuse us 23:00:09 I see no action items