19:57:52 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #vcwg
19:57:52 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2022/01/12-vcwg-irc
19:58:08 <brentz> zakim, start the meeting
19:58:09 <Zakim> RRSAgent, make logs Public
19:58:11 <Zakim> please title this meeting ("meeting: ..."), brentz
19:58:28 <brentz> meeting: Verifiable Credentials Working Group
19:58:41 <brentz> chair: brentz
19:58:53 <brentz> zakim, this is vcwg
19:58:53 <Zakim> got it, brentz
19:58:56 <markus_sabadello> markus_sabadello has joined #vcwg
19:59:32 <rgrant> rgrant has joined #vcwg
20:00:10 <brentz> present+
20:00:12 <shigeya> present+ shigeya
20:00:33 <loganporter> loganporter has joined #vcwg
20:01:05 <markus_sabadello> present+
20:01:10 <loganporter> present+
20:01:27 <brentz> present+ rgrant
20:02:17 <manu> present+
20:02:33 <dlongley> present+
20:02:35 <JoeAndrieu_> JoeAndrieu_ has joined #vcwg
20:02:37 <markus_sabadello> scribe+
20:02:38 <JoeAndrieu_> present+
20:02:53 <DavicC> DavicC has joined #vcwg
20:02:54 <markus_sabadello> brent: We begin with agenda review
20:02:59 <DavicC> Present+
20:03:25 <markus_sabadello> brentz: Agenda is plan for meetings going forward, then conversations about draft charter, review PR, issues
20:03:29 <markus_sabadello> brentz: Any additions to the agenda?
20:03:35 <brentz> Topic: Meetings moving forward
20:04:01 <markus_sabadello> brentz: The voting period for changes we proposed for VC Data Model that will result in 1.1, that period is up on 18th January
20:04:11 <markus_sabadello> brentz: This means we have fulfilled the primary purpose of this WG
20:04:19 <markus_sabadello> brentz: So far all votes to my knowledge have been positive
20:04:33 <markus_sabadello> brentz: I anticipate that we will want to determine how much work we as a WG have the capacity for
20:05:03 <markus_sabadello> brentz: My thought is between this week and next, if it works for the editors, we could create the set of editorial changes that we want to fold in as soon as 1.1 spec is released
20:05:14 <markus_sabadello> brentz: Then next week we can make a WG resolution to incorporate changes
20:05:30 <markus_sabadello> brentz: After that, i think it makes more sense to meet less often, and focus on WG charter for the next group
20:05:33 <manu> q+ to support what Brent said
20:05:36 <markus_sabadello> brentz: Feedback about this?
20:05:37 <DavicC> q+
20:05:39 <brentz> ack manu
20:05:39 <Zakim> manu, you wanted to support what Brent said
20:05:50 <markus_sabadello> manu: Largely supportive of that. I think we fulfilled charter tfor 1.1. update
20:06:05 <markus_sabadello> manu: There are still some 1.1 editorial issues, I will make a pass through to see which ones really need to get in there
20:06:14 <markus_sabadello> manu: I don't think there is anything that can't wait until re-chartering
20:06:21 <markus_sabadello> manu: Also +1 to focusing on charter
20:06:39 <markus_sabadello> manu: Did you say we will have fewer meetings? E.g. once a month? Or similar to DID WG?
20:06:49 <markus_sabadello> manu: I'd be supportive of scaling back to once a month, or ad-hoc
20:06:56 <markus_sabadello> brentz: That was my intention to say
20:07:00 <brentz> ack DavicC
20:07:08 <markus_sabadello> DavicC: When do we expect 2.0 WG to start?
20:07:22 <markus_sabadello> brentz: Really good question. I had a good conversation with Ivan who is planning to be team contact.
20:07:30 <markus_sabadello> brentz: I also had a good conversation with potential co-chair.
20:08:04 <markus_sabadello> brentz: Best timeline we could come up with was .. Charter gets formally reviewed by AC and voted.. We could see new WG as early as late March, that's a best guess.
20:08:18 <markus_sabadello> brentz: Any other questions about meetings, document status?
20:08:38 <markus_sabadello> DavicC: Another question.. If during next week we do edits, can we still do edits in between now and March?
20:08:49 <markus_sabadello> brentz: There is always more work that we _can_ do
20:09:14 <markus_sabadello> brentz: Speaking personally, with all the DID work and this, it's been a heavy load, and a period without much spec work may be beneficial
20:09:34 <markus_sabadello> DavicC: So we should only concentrate on really pressing issues
20:09:59 <markus_sabadello> brentz: I think officially our charter ends at the end of April. That doesn't mean we have to continue meeting weekly, considering we have met charter demands.
20:10:08 <brentz> Topic: VCWG Draft Charter
20:10:17 <brentz> https://github.com/w3c/vc-wg-charter/issues?q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+sort%3Aupdated-asc
20:10:25 <markus_sabadello> brentz: I believe there are 2 issues and we can close 1
20:10:39 <brentz> subtopic: https://github.com/w3c/vc-wg-charter/issues/21
20:11:15 <markus_sabadello> brentz: The discussion we had in this meeting, with lack of response from MikeJones who posted the issue, in my opinion this issue has been addressed and can be closed.
20:11:17 <manu> +1 to closing, agree with brentz's assessment.
20:11:19 <markus_sabadello> brentz: Any disagrees?
20:11:39 <markus_sabadello> brentz: Going to write a quick note and close it.
20:11:55 <brentz> subtopic: https://github.com/w3c/vc-wg-charter/issues/38
20:12:51 <markus_sabadello> shigeya: Sometimes we need to select from multiple image files to handle multi lingual text. Images may contain text inside images.
20:13:04 <markus_sabadello> shigeya: This is different from how multilingual text is handled
20:13:25 <markus_sabadello> shigeya: I was thinking about opening a PR, but I could not find a good way to disclose that in a simple text
20:13:38 <markus_sabadello> brentz: Manu posted a comment
20:13:41 <markus_sabadello> manu: But I was wrong
20:13:43 <manu> q+
20:13:50 <markus_sabadello> brentz: Any suggestions for shigeya how to address this?
20:13:52 <brentz> ack manu
20:14:21 <markus_sabadello> manu: We should reach out to Internationalization folks. We might want to ask them. Nothing is coming to mind, I understand the problem and desired to address it, but I don't know..
20:14:35 <markus_sabadello> manu: I could think of one way in JSON-LD how to do it, but not in this text approach.
20:14:43 <markus_sabadello> manu: Maybe Internationalization folks have an idea how this can be done
20:14:56 <markus_sabadello> shigeya: I will talk to my friend to find out who is best to talk to
20:15:04 <markus_sabadello> brentz: As you discover things, please add comments to the issue
20:15:12 <DavicC> q+
20:15:15 <markus_sabadello> brentz: That is the set of issues. There are 2 PRs.
20:15:18 <brentz> ack DavicC
20:15:53 <markus_sabadello> DavicC: Work Human Colossus is doing on OCA could be a solution for this. They have tables with different tables to represent things. Table could also contain multiple images.
20:16:09 <markus_sabadello> DavicC: I think markus is familiar with this
20:16:15 <markus_sabadello> markus_sabadello: Little bit, but not enough to solve this
20:16:36 <markus_sabadello> DavicC: I'll give you an email address of Human Colossus lead, you can chat to him directly. There are various presentations on Google, Youtube..
20:16:48 <brentz> subtopic: https://github.com/w3c/vc-wg-charter/pulls
20:16:48 <markus_sabadello> DavicC: On ESSIF-Lab they did a demo a few weeks ago
20:16:51 <markus_sabadello> brentz: Move on to PRs
20:17:05 <brentz> subtopic: https://github.com/w3c/vc-wg-charter/pull/37
20:17:08 <manu> q+
20:17:16 <brentz> ack manu
20:17:41 <markus_sabadello> manu: At a previous meeting we decided we wanted to move some cryptosuites into normative deliverables.
20:17:56 <markus_sabadello> manu: Data Integrity is not a concrete serialization, but Ed25519 and JWP are
20:18:23 <markus_sabadello> manu: This says we will work on concrete cryptosuites, and it lists some preliminary work that the WG could standardize
20:18:32 <DavicC> paul.knowles@humancolossus.org for details of Overlays Capture Architecture (OCA) that should provide a solution to multi-lingual images
20:18:42 <markus_sabadello> manu: Markus raised a good point, what if we want to standardize additional cryptosuites. Current language isn't clear on it
20:19:05 <markus_sabadello> manu: Specifically, we don't directly list NIST curves like P-386, we probably should add some language
20:19:08 <rgrant> +1 to language allowing too add curves
20:19:16 <markus_sabadello> manu: Prefer to not pull in the PR until that language is in there
20:19:32 <rgrant> q+
20:19:47 <markus_sabadello> s/but Ed25519 and JWP are/but Ed25519 and VC-JWT are/
20:19:56 <markus_sabadello> brentz: I think we could leave it a bit more open
20:20:01 <brentz> ack rgrant
20:20:05 <manu> q+ on the danger of open language (to argue against what I just said)
20:20:18 <markus_sabadello> rgrant: Is there a requirement to focus only on NIST curves?
20:20:25 <brentz> ack manu
20:20:25 <Zakim> manu, you wanted to comment on the danger of open language (to argue against what I just said)
20:20:27 <markus_sabadello> manu: k1 curve potentially
20:20:36 <bumblefudge> bumblefudge has joined #vcwg
20:20:51 <bumblefudge> hey @shigeya
20:20:51 <markus_sabadello> manu: If we are vague, we might do normative things on all of it. This might be a red flag on charter review, since we're not very clear on concrete realizations we want to do.
20:21:00 <markus_sabadello> manu: Feedback may be we need to specify this exactly.
20:21:10 <markus_sabadello> manu: W3C members don't like very open charters
20:21:11 <bumblefudge> the oca repo is here: https://github.com/the-human-colossus-foundation/oca-spec
20:21:27 <markus_sabadello> manu: That's the challenge with making it more general. If we can't point to a draft spec, people might push back on it.
20:21:32 <bumblefudge> they do some overlay/decorator stuff for mapping VC property names to new languages and char-sets
20:21:38 <shigeya> @bumblefudge thank you very much. Will check the repo.
20:21:40 <markus_sabadello> manu: Easiest thing to do would be to point to draft spec. I think there is one for k1.
20:21:47 <bumblefudge> it may be helpful.  i believe it's MIT if I remember correctly
20:21:55 <markus_sabadello> manu: Before charter goes out for review, someone could create a cryptosuite
20:22:11 <bumblefudge> described here: https://humancolossus.foundation/blog/cjzegoi58xgpfzwxyrqlroy48dihwz
20:22:17 <markus_sabadello> manu: Safest thing to do would be, if you want a particular type of cryposuite to be standardized, create a draft spec for it that we can cite in the charter.
20:22:22 <markus_sabadello> https://w3c-ccg.github.io/lds-ecdsa-secp256k1-2019/ ?
20:22:26 <rgrant> makes sense here
20:22:56 <markus_sabadello> brentz: How harmful would it be to include a line "an others as determined by the WG"
20:23:08 <markus_sabadello> manu: We can do that, I would expect that to result in a Formal Objection
20:23:11 <markus_sabadello> manu: We could try
20:23:24 <markus_sabadello> manu: If we are tied to it, we probably should be very specific
20:23:30 <markus_sabadello> brentz: So we hold off on merging this PR
20:23:43 <markus_sabadello> brentz: Make comments on the PR if you want additional cryptosuites
20:24:03 <markus_sabadello> manu: If someone wants a NIST curve, we could put together a cryptosuite
20:24:08 <markus_sabadello> brentz: Other comments or questions?
20:24:11 <brentz> subtopic: https://github.com/w3c/vc-wg-charter/pull/39
20:24:32 <manu> +1 to merge.
20:24:38 <markus_sabadello> brentz: Markus fixed a link, appreciate that
20:24:40 <markus_sabadello> brentz: Any concerns?
20:25:23 <markus_sabadello> brentz: That's our draft charter work, like I said we anticipate within a couple of weeks sending it out to the AC.
20:25:34 <brentz> Topic: Review PRs
20:25:35 <markus_sabadello> brentz: We don't have a lot of time to discuss; if there is any more tweaking, it needs to happen soon
20:25:41 <brentz> https://github.com/w3c/vc-data-model/pulls?q=is%3Apr+is%3Aopen+label%3A%22v1.1+%28editorial%29%22+sort%3Aupdated-asc
20:26:28 <manu> https://github.com/w3c/vc-data-model/pull/847
20:26:28 <brentz> subtopic: https://github.com/w3c/vc-data-model/pull/847
20:26:53 <markus_sabadello> brentz: By Kyle, this tries to add language to clarify difference between @context and credentialSchema
20:26:58 <markus_sabadello> s/brentz/manu/
20:27:15 <markus_sabadello> manu: I asked for changes, DavicC asked for changes as well. DavicC you rejected this?
20:27:33 <markus_sabadello> DavicC: I don't know what the results of my proposed edits are. If my edits are accepted, I'd be +1
20:27:48 <markus_sabadello> DavicC: I got -1 from him, he doesn't want to add types, seems he is rejecting all my changes
20:27:57 <markus_sabadello> manu: So we can't do anything with this without more discussion
20:28:07 <markus_sabadello> DavicC: He accepted one of my proposed changes
20:28:21 <markus_sabadello> manu: I forgot to hit my "request changes" button.
20:28:31 <markus_sabadello> manu: We can't pull it in, will pick it up later
20:28:49 <markus_sabadello> manu: Adding a comment to the PR about there still being disagreement
20:28:59 <brentz> subtopic: https://github.com/w3c/vc-data-model/pull/859
20:29:14 <markus_sabadello> manu: Renaming LD Proofs to Data Integrity, by Markus
20:29:31 <markus_sabadello> manu: I haven't approved it yet, looks like it does what it says, looks good to me
20:29:46 <markus_sabadello> manu: It's a change we've made across the board
20:29:54 <markus_sabadello> manu: Anyone on the call concerned with this?
20:30:34 <markus_sabadello> manu: We had just 1 day period on this PR..
20:30:48 <markus_sabadello> brentz: I think we need a resolution what we will merge next week
20:30:51 <markus_sabadello> manu: This will go in
20:31:00 <bumblefudge> bumblefudge has joined #vcwg
20:31:08 <brentz> subtopic: https://github.com/w3c/vc-data-model/pull/855
20:31:21 <markus_sabadello> manu: Set of hand-optimizations to SVG files by Charles
20:31:32 <markus_sabadello> manu: brentz I think you were concerned about changes you requested?
20:31:40 <markus_sabadello> brentz: I believe requested changes have been made
20:31:46 <markus_sabadello> manu: No objections I can see
20:32:01 <markus_sabadello> manu: If there are no huge problems with it, we should take the PR into the change set for next week
20:32:20 <markus_sabadello> manu: Any objections or concerns?
20:32:23 <markus_sabadello> manu: Charles is basically optimizing and compressing SVGs.
20:32:48 <brentz> subtopic: https://github.com/w3c/vc-data-model/pull/857
20:32:58 <markus_sabadello> manu: DavicC 5 days ago you opened this, and got changes requested from dlongley
20:33:09 <markus_sabadello> manu: I guess as long as these changes are made, this should go into change set for next week
20:33:23 <markus_sabadello> manu: These are all of our 1.1 editorial PRs
20:33:38 <markus_sabadello> manu: For 847 there's time until next week to try to resolve it
20:33:52 <brentz> Topic: Triage Issues
20:34:06 <markus_sabadello> brentz: We still have a week to try and get PRs in
20:34:20 <brentz> https://github.com/w3c/vc-data-model/issues?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Aissue+-label%3Av2.0+-label%3A%22v1.1+%28editorial%29%22+sort%3Aupdated-asc
20:34:25 <markus_sabadello> brentz: It's still worth looking at issues to see if they fit in scope of work that is still before us
20:34:55 <manu> q+
20:34:58 <markus_sabadello> brentz: Support for multiple signatures https://github.com/w3c/vc-data-model/issues/856, appying a v2.0 label now
20:35:06 <brentz> ack manu
20:35:15 <markus_sabadello> manu: No concerns with the actions. We do have a number of items that are marked as 1.1 editorial
20:35:20 <markus_sabadello> brentz: That's the next topic
20:35:21 <brentz> Topic: v1.1 Issues
20:35:31 <brentz> https://github.com/w3c/vc-data-model/issues?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Aissue+label%3A%22v1.1+%28editorial%29%22+sort%3Aupdated-asc
20:35:57 <markus_sabadello> brentz: All v1.1. editorial issues are at this link. Any of them we want to get into the spec? We should sort that out pretty much today
20:36:27 <DavicC> q+
20:36:29 <markus_sabadello> manu: Maybe just ask everyone on the call to look at them, and scream if one needs to be addressed?
20:36:48 <brentz> ack DavicC
20:36:56 <markus_sabadello> DavicC: I'm interested in JWT examples
20:37:00 <markus_sabadello> manu: I'll take that action
20:37:07 <markus_sabadello> DavicC: That's a really good beneficial improvement
20:37:20 <markus_sabadello> DavicC: Issues 836 and 838?
20:37:32 <markus_sabadello> manu: I'm talking about 838
20:37:46 <markus_sabadello> DavicC: It's the presigned, which is useful
20:38:00 <markus_sabadello> manu: If I can get to it, I will
20:38:02 <markus_sabadello> DavicC: Can I help you?
20:38:10 <markus_sabadello> manu: Sure, add the features to the software library
20:38:16 <markus_sabadello> DavicC: Can I hand-do it?
20:38:24 <markus_sabadello> manu: No, it's automatically applied, requires software development
20:38:42 <markus_sabadello> manu: I'll try to do it, it will be in the same area of code.. Just depends whether I have enough time to do it
20:38:56 <markus_sabadello> brentz: Is it different code for every example?
20:39:10 <markus_sabadello> manu: Just need to write the code, test it, pull in new version.. Not hard, just takes time
20:39:39 <markus_sabadello> brentz: Anything else people feel needs to happen?
20:39:50 <markus_sabadello> brentz: Otherwise issues will wait for next WG where we can cover them
20:40:18 <markus_sabadello> brentz: Plan is to meet again in 1 week at a slightly earlier time. We will have a recently published revised recommendation
20:40:45 <markus_sabadello> brentz: We will have a set of PRs that we have already merged, and a set of PRs in addition to that, and a proposal to the group to incorporate them
20:41:11 <markus_sabadello> brentz: Kyle should we talk about the PR with you and DavicC ?
20:41:21 <markus_sabadello> Kyle: I can review Github comments
20:41:29 <markus_sabadello> brentz: I think 1-on-1 between you and DavicC would be helpful
20:41:34 <markus_sabadello> Kyle: Makes sense
20:41:58 <markus_sabadello> DavicC: Timezone is challenging.. Should we have a private Zoom call now?
20:42:01 <kdenhartog> kdenhartog has joined #vcwg
20:42:01 <markus_sabadello> Kyle: Works for me
20:42:09 <markus_sabadello> brentz: Will end this meeting.
20:42:17 <markus_sabadello> DavicC: Can we stay on this Zoom?
20:42:24 <markus_sabadello> brentz: It should stay open
20:42:34 <juancaballero> thx all
20:42:43 <markus_sabadello> brentz: Thanks everyone for incredible work, looking forward to working with you in a newly chartered group
20:43:22 <brentz> zakim, who is here?
20:43:22 <Zakim> Present: brentz, shigeya, markus_sabadello, loganporter, rgrant, manu, dlongley, JoeAndrieu_, DavicC
20:43:24 <Zakim> On IRC I see kdenhartog, bumblefudge, DavicC, JoeAndrieu_, rgrant, markus_sabadello, RRSAgent, Zakim, brentz, tzviya, cel, wayne, hadleybeeman, shigeya, manu, dlongley, stonematt,
20:43:24 <Zakim> ... bigbluehat, cel[m], juancaballero, dlehn, rhiaro, agendabot
20:43:42 <brentz> present+ bumblefudge
20:44:04 <brentz> zakim, end the meeting
20:44:04 <Zakim> As of this point the attendees have been brentz, shigeya, markus_sabadello, loganporter, rgrant, manu, dlongley, JoeAndrieu_, DavicC, bumblefudge
20:44:06 <Zakim> RRSAgent, please draft minutes
20:44:06 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2022/01/12-vcwg-minutes.html Zakim
20:44:09 <Zakim> I am happy to have been of service, brentz; please remember to excuse RRSAgent.  Goodbye
20:44:14 <Zakim> Zakim has left #vcwg
20:44:18 <brentz> rrsagent, goodbye
20:44:18 <RRSAgent> I'm logging. I don't understand 'goodbye', brentz.  Try /msg RRSAgent help
20:44:24 <brentz> rrsagent, bye
20:44:24 <RRSAgent> I see no action items