18:56:30 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #vcwg
18:56:30 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2022/07/20-vcwg-irc
18:57:58 <brentz> brentz has changed the topic to: VCWG Agenda 2022-07-20 https://www.w3.org/events/meetings/c5abcc63-337b-4ebb-97af-7cc2fb63de11/20220720T150000
18:58:15 <brentz> zakim, start meeting
18:58:15 <Zakim> RRSAgent, make logs Public
18:58:16 <Zakim> please title this meeting ("meeting: ..."), brentz
18:58:30 <brentz> meeting: Verifiable Credentials Working Group
18:58:36 <brentz> chair: brentz
18:59:57 <mprorock> mprorock has joined #vcwg
19:00:17 <brentz> Date: 2022-07-20
19:00:22 <brentz> present+
19:00:22 <Logan_Porter> Logan_Porter has joined #vcwg
19:00:34 <mprorock> present+
19:00:51 <Logan_Porter> present+
19:00:59 <shigeya> present+
19:01:38 <manu> present+
19:01:41 <decentralgabe> decentralgabe has joined #vcwg
19:01:47 <decentralgabe> present+
19:01:53 <selfissued> selfissued has joined #vcwg
19:01:56 <selfissued> present+
19:02:11 <Orie> Orie has joined #vcwg
19:02:13 <dwaite> dwaite has joined #vcwg
19:02:14 <Orie> present+
19:02:22 <dwaite> present+
19:02:32 <kristina_> kristina_ has joined #vcwg
19:02:33 <kristina_> present+
19:02:42 <kdeangs1> kdeangs1 has joined #vcwg
19:04:42 <kdeangs1> scribe+
19:04:54 <dmitriz> dmitriz has joined #vcwg
19:05:54 <awhitehead> awhitehead has joined #vcwg
19:06:26 <kdeangs1> brentz: Reviewed agenda
19:06:35 <brentz> Topic: Participation renewal
19:06:53 <justin_r> justin_r has joined #vcwg
19:07:18 <brentz> Topic: Expectations for JWT-VC
19:07:41 <TallTed> TallTed has joined #vcwg
19:08:08 <kdeangs1> brentz: Reviewed editors for VC documents
19:08:29 <manu> q+ to note scribe needs to write that stuff down :)
19:08:58 <kristina_> scribe+
19:09:35 <manu> q-
19:09:35 <brentz> ack manu
19:10:01 <kristina_> brent: editors of the deliverables that chairs have named. vc-data-model - Manu, Mike J, Orie, and Gabe;...
19:10:22 <kdeangs1> Goal of topics today is to set goals for each work item and to have conversations around work modes
19:10:40 <Orie> q+
19:10:54 <brentz> ack Orie
19:10:57 <kdeangs1> Orie: Talking about VC-JOT
19:11:07 <manu> s/VC-JOT/VC-JWT/
19:11:19 <oliver> oliver has joined #vcwg
19:11:19 <sb> sb has joined #vcwg
19:11:28 <oliver> present+ oliver_terbu
19:11:41 <kdeangs1> Harder to start the work on, probably have enough to get going. Copying over from the current data model only parts relevant to JWT to get started.
19:11:53 <manu> s/Harder/... Harder/
19:11:59 <mprorock> +1 orie - copy over existing as a starting place for add ons
19:12:04 <kdeangs1> Just base components copied over. Opens the door to adding text related to JWT moving forward.
19:12:13 <kristina_> under securing VCs. jwt-vc: MikeJ, Orie; JsonWebSignature2020: Orie, MikeP, MikeJ; Data Integrity: Manu...
19:12:19 <manu> +1 orie - copy VC-JWT section to new spec as a starting place, do a FPWD using that.
19:12:31 <kdeangs1> Right first step for the group to take.
19:12:32 <kristina_> if interested in being an editor, please reach out to the chairs...
19:12:32 <manu> q+ to support
19:12:39 <kristina_> chairs might reach out to you
19:13:08 <kristina_> lol justin
19:13:17 <TallTed> https://www.w3.org/2008/04/scribe.html
19:13:18 <TallTed> :-)
19:13:43 <kristina_> q+
19:13:47 <kristina_> q-
19:13:52 <sb> +1 and I haven't spoken up yet, but am happy to help edit VC JWT and do whatever Orie and Mike tell me to do :)
19:13:55 <JoeAndrieu> JoeAndrieu has joined #vcwg
19:14:01 <JoeAndrieu> present+
19:14:05 <brentz> ack manu
19:14:05 <Zakim> manu, you wanted to support
19:14:05 <selfissued> q+
19:14:05 <manu> https://www.w3.org/TR/vc-data-model/#json-web-token
19:14:21 <kdeangs1> manu: Supports general proposal. Notes that section of the spec that Orie is referring to is 3.1.
19:14:47 <kdeangs1> ... Only other thing is that there are a couple other issues in the data model that are JWT-specific and should be transferred over.
19:14:52 <brentz> ack selfissued
19:15:37 <kdeangs1> selfissued: Separate repositories and issue trackers for each spec.
19:15:51 <manu> q+ to note "copy out of data integrity"
19:15:58 <brentz> ack manu
19:15:58 <Zakim> manu, you wanted to note "copy out of data integrity"
19:16:00 <kdeangs1> ... Once these are copied, next step is to delete them from the existing repositories.
19:16:12 <mprorock> +1 selfissued
19:16:13 <kdeangs1> manu: Different document for data integrity.
19:16:42 <kdeangs1> ... Data model should just refer to documents to which its contents are copied.
19:16:43 <Orie> I think we will want to remove "proof" examples form the vc data model... at some point.
19:16:51 <brentz> Topic: Expectations for JsonWebSignature2020
19:17:02 <kdeangs1> brentz: Next topic is JWS-2020.
19:17:05 <Orie> q+
19:17:09 <Marty_Reed> Marty_Reed has joined #vcwg
19:17:11 <mprorock> q+
19:17:17 <brentz> ack Orie
19:17:31 <kdeangs1> Orie: WOoking with manu on how to get started.
19:17:39 <kdeangs1> ... Working too.
19:17:48 <mprorock> https://github.com/w3c-ccg/lds-jws2020/
19:18:00 <kdeangs1> ... Most of the spec work done, confirmed with group that it was OK to move everything over.
19:18:15 <kdeangs1> ... Already opened issue to cover the proposal.
19:18:20 <mprorock> https://github.com/w3c-ccg/lds-jws2020/pull/98
19:18:37 <kdeangs1> ... Existing repo will become read-only archive for history.
19:18:56 <kdeangs1> ... Pull request in CCG to tackle the beginning.
19:19:04 <manu> q+ to note that I agree with orie wrt. his suggestion for how to handle jws2020.
19:19:14 <brentz> ack mprorock
19:19:26 <kdeangs1> mprorock: Big support for Orie for this repo.
19:19:27 <Orie> Here is the current PR https://github.com/w3c-ccg/lds-jws2020/pull/98
19:19:49 <kdeangs1> ... Once repo setup is done, in a position to take pull requests.
19:19:53 <brentz> ack manu
19:19:53 <Zakim> manu, you wanted to note that I agree with orie wrt. his suggestion for how to handle jws2020.
19:20:06 <Orie> Here is the new repo: https://github.com/w3c/vc-jws-2020
19:20:13 <kdeangs1> manu: +1 to Orie.
19:20:27 <kdeangs1> ... Don't want to apply same process to other repos, need to make different decisions.
19:20:39 <Orie> To be clear, I'm only talking about doing this, for this repo... not the other ones
19:20:47 <mprorock> q+
19:20:51 <manu> q+ to note process, which is squirrely.
19:21:00 <brentz> ack mprorock
19:21:40 <kdeangs1> Orie: Wants to have new rendered version of the spec in the VC working group with a draft title. Wants CI system to take editors' draft revisions.
19:22:15 <kdeangs1> ... Doesn't feel that it's ready to be published in its current form. If we have to do a first publish as first action, still happy to do it that way.
19:22:17 <manu> We don't have to do a FPWD right off the bat.
19:22:21 <brentz> ack manu
19:22:21 <Zakim> manu, you wanted to note process, which is squirrely.
19:22:22 <dmitriz_> dmitriz_ has joined #vcwg
19:22:48 <mprorock> q+
19:22:54 <kdeangs1> manu: W3C process doesn't require FPWD as part of the process of moving the document over to a new repository. FPWD requires working group approval.
19:23:40 <kdeangs1> ... Kicks off the process of handing sets of documents over to the working groups, already started.
19:24:01 <Orie> q+ to note you can't publish them in ccg until you have a thing to point to in the wg
19:24:01 <kdeangs1> ... Need to publish through CCG and need to coordinate with staff contact to publish in permanent location and get final IPR commitments.
19:24:20 <kdeangs1> ... All of that can happen in parallel. Don't need to block us doing editors' drafts.
19:24:39 <kdeangs1> ... Usually done in serial.
19:25:03 <kdeangs1> ... Only IPR can affect doing in parallel. That's OK over the next month or two.
19:25:23 <kristina_> q+
19:25:35 <kdeangs1> ... Order of operations: publish as final community group specification, get IPR commitments, move int VCWG, publish as editor's draft.
19:25:35 <brentz> ack mprorock
19:26:17 <kdeangs1> mprorock: Agrees IPR transfer is the biggest issue. Feels better when stuff is signed off to avoid potential problems.
19:26:23 <brentz> ack Orie
19:26:23 <Zakim> Orie, you wanted to note you can't publish them in ccg until you have a thing to point to in the wg
19:27:02 <mprorock> +1 editor draft existance
19:27:14 <kdeangs1> Orie: Get an error when version is not properly specified. First action should be to take an editor's draft that can be pointed to immediately as source for first revision.
19:27:15 <manu> q+ to note URL for "latestRevision".
19:27:27 <brentz> ack kristina_
19:27:54 <kdeangs1> kristina_: Thinks IPR requirements are different between working groups and community groups. Reach out to chairs to ensure everything is in order.
19:27:54 <mprorock> +1 kristina - better by the book on this
19:28:02 <brentz> ack manu
19:28:02 <Zakim> manu, you wanted to note URL for "latestRevision".
19:28:03 <kdeangs1> manu: +1 to kristina_
19:28:17 <Orie> This bit here, this is what I would prefer to point to the W3C WG: https://github.com/w3c-ccg/lds-jws2020/pull/98/files#diff-b04b38d4e36f7a7171aeb211bf933eaf36d41d9866ebbc3639f673f84dc350aeR24
19:28:34 <kdeangs1> ... Process was setup specifically for documents moving from WG to CG.
19:29:14 <kdeangs1> ... Latest revision URL has to point to proper version. Can't point to a GitHub URL, has to be at w3.org.
19:29:29 <kdeangs1> ... +1 to parallelize this.
19:29:42 <mprorock> q+
19:29:47 <kdeangs1> ... Doesn't believe we are creating any risk by working on it in parallel.
19:29:56 <brentz> ack mprorock
19:29:58 <Orie> to get around the "respec" issue, I just pointed it to our charter :) ... I would prefer to have it throw a respec error and point to a proper editors draft.
19:30:23 <kdeangs1> mprorock: Recent example at IETF where folks got a little hasty and things were not in order, created chaos that didn't need to exist.
19:30:33 <kdeangs1> ... Get moving, but be aware of risk.
19:30:40 <manu> q+ to note timeframe to get sign off, just so folks know.
19:30:48 <brentz> ack manu
19:30:48 <Zakim> manu, you wanted to note timeframe to get sign off, just so folks know.
19:30:52 <kdeangs1> manu: +1 to mprorock
19:31:03 <kdeangs1> ... Long timeframe to get IPR commitments (up to a month).
19:31:19 <mprorock> +1 manu
19:31:20 <kdeangs1> ... Because of the number of documents, it is the editors' jobs to get IPR commitments.
19:31:50 <kdeangs1> ... Sometimes person is non-responsive. Content then reviewed to determine any IPR concerns.
19:32:04 <kdeangs1> ... Group pulls in changes if no issues.
19:32:30 <kdeangs1> brentz: Supports the notion that we need to work in parallel.
19:32:41 <kdeangs1> ... Not concerned about moving forward with a little bit of boldness.
19:33:20 <manu> q+
19:33:41 <kdeangs1> ... One last comment, do not believe we need to make a formal resolution. Does anyone oppose moving the JWS-2020 from CCG to VC WG?
19:34:06 <kdeangs1> ... Heard no oppositionb.
19:34:18 <Orie> I would also like to do an ED for VC-JWT and move over the proof section.
19:34:21 <brentz> ack manu
19:34:34 <kdeangs1> manu: Would prefer that we have a resolution. This is an active thing that the working group is doing, would rather have it on the record.
19:34:53 <kdeangs1> ... No opposition is probably good enough, but resolution would be better.
19:35:16 <kdeangs1> brentz: Offers to draft proposal or ask others to do so.
19:36:02 <kristina_> can we say CCG?
19:36:15 <TallTed> Proposals can be (and have been) carried by lack of opposition, and then recorded as resolution, but I'm fine to flip to voting. It does help to write the proposal & resolution as such.
19:36:26 <kdeangs1> brentz: Will go ahead and run the proposal.
19:36:36 <brentz> PROPOSAL: The workgroup will pull in the lds-jws2020 ccg work item into the vcwg and cut an ed for it
19:36:41 <manu> +1
19:36:42 <TallTed> +1
19:36:42 <Orie> +1
19:36:42 <mprorock> +1
19:36:46 <kristina_> +1
19:36:47 <Logan_Porter> +1
19:36:49 <kdeangs1> +1
19:36:51 <shigeya> +1
19:36:51 <JoeAndrieu> +1
19:36:52 <brentz> +1
19:36:52 <Marty_Reed> +1
19:37:00 <decentralgabe> +1
19:37:01 <selfissued> +1
19:37:09 <sb> +1
19:37:14 <dwaite> +1
19:37:19 <brentz> RESOLVED: The workgroup will pull in the lds-jws2020 ccg work item into the vcwg and cut an ed for it
19:37:41 <brentz> Topic: Expectations for Data Integrity
19:37:41 <kdeangs1> brentz: Moving on to data integrity.
19:37:46 <manu> q+
19:37:52 <brentz> ack manu
19:37:59 <kdeangs1> manu: Sent an email to mailing list.
19:38:06 <mprorock> https://www.w3.org/TR/vc-data-model/#data-integrity-proofs
19:38:16 <kdeangs1> ... Data integrity specification is a way of doing signatures on JSON-LD document, not specific to Linked Data.
19:38:38 <kdeangs1> ... Base specification, meant to be paired with crypto suites, gives some general parameters around attaching digital proofs to document.
19:39:01 <kdeangs1> ... Crypto suites document explains how to do it using various crypto suites.
19:39:07 <manu> https://w3c-ccg.github.io/data-integrity-spec/FCGS/2022-07-22/
19:39:27 <kdeangs1> ... Spec itself is cut to a final CCG specification, with instructions to VC staff to put in permanent location.
19:40:46 <mprorock> +1
19:40:55 <brentz> PROPOSAL: We will use the CCG Data Integrity Spec as the starting point for Data Integrity in the VCWG
19:40:56 <TallTed> +1
19:40:57 <manu> +1
19:40:58 <brentz> +1
19:41:00 <mprorock> +1
19:41:01 <sb> +1
19:41:02 <Marty_Reed> +1
19:41:03 <kdeangs1> +1
19:41:06 <Orie> +1
19:41:07 <Logan_Porter> +1
19:41:08 <JoeAndrieu> +1
19:41:11 <shigeya> +1
19:41:24 <selfissued> +1
19:41:29 <kristina_> +1
19:41:35 <kdeangs1> brentz: To manu, do you want to run a proposal for first working draft?
19:41:48 <kdeangs1> manu: No, let's get a couple editor drafts going.
19:41:50 <mprorock> q+
19:42:03 <kdeangs1> mprorock: Agreeing to serve as editor.
19:42:15 <brentz> ack mprorock
19:42:23 <kdeangs1> kristina_: Supports mprorock as editor.
19:42:31 <decentra_> decentra_ has joined #vcwg
19:42:44 <brentz> RESOLVED: We will use the CCG Data Integrity Spec as the starting point for Data Integrity in the VCWG
19:43:03 <manu> q+
19:43:10 <brentz> ack manu
19:43:31 <kdeangs1> manu: Thinks that we may want to parallel-track one or two other specs, namely the crypto suites themselves, due to interplay.
19:43:47 <brentz> q+
19:43:53 <brentz> ack brentz
19:44:16 <kdeangs1> brentz: Believe that we should run in parallel as much as we are able.
19:44:58 <brentz> Topic: Data Model FPWD and Issues
19:45:32 <decentra_> +1
19:45:36 <kdeangs1> +1
19:45:39 <kristina_> q+
19:45:51 <brentz> ack kristina_
19:45:53 <decentra_> proposal to make the proposed proposal a real proposal
19:46:20 <manu> q+ to note make it more difficult than we need to.
19:46:28 <selfissued> q+
19:46:31 <kdeangs1> kristina_: Asking if should take 1.1 as is.
19:46:40 <kdeangs1> brentz: Take it as is to be first working draft.
19:46:40 <brentz> ack manu
19:46:40 <Zakim> manu, you wanted to note make it more difficult than we need to.
19:46:49 <Orie> q+ to propose getting to EDs as fast as possible
19:47:15 <kdeangs1> manu: Agrees in principle but it will take a while to get other documents in place.
19:47:28 <kdeangs1> ... Believes we all agree with what's in the document so far.
19:47:41 <kdeangs1> ... Concerned that we will have to wait a bit for data integrity document.
19:48:05 <TallTed> PROPOSAL: We will publish Verifiable Credentials Data Model v1.1 as the FPWD for Verifiable Credentials Data Model v2.0, with plan to ~immediately execute today's change resolutions
19:48:08 <brentz> ack selfissued
19:48:16 <TallTed> bah. action meta key fail.
19:48:42 <kdeangs1> selfissued: Supports having first editor's draft as copy of VC 1.1 with no changes. First thing we should do after that is remove stuff that is redundant with other specs.
19:49:05 <kdeangs1> ... Doesn't care if that's the first or second working draft. Removal of redundancy should be first work before anything else.
19:49:13 <brentz> ack Orie
19:49:13 <Zakim> Orie, you wanted to propose getting to EDs as fast as possible
19:49:32 <manu> q+ to note why FPWD that looks exactly like first cut
19:49:44 <kdeangs1> Orie: Get to having editors' drafts as soon as possible. Don't think it's worth cutting the proof section out first.
19:50:00 <brentz> ack manu
19:50:00 <Zakim> manu, you wanted to note why FPWD that looks exactly like first cut
19:50:01 <kdeangs1> ... Publish versions only when we feel that they're worthy of being published.
19:50:21 <kdeangs1> manu: Reason for doing FPWD is to start the IPR process.
19:50:26 <mprorock> +1 manu
19:50:31 <kdeangs1> ... Sooner that you start that clock the better.
19:50:54 <kdeangs1> ... If any plan to claim IP, want to know sooner rather than later.
19:51:54 <kristina_> I would be fine too
19:51:56 <brentz> PROPOSAL: We will publish Verifiable Credentials Data Model v1.1 as the FPWD for Verifiable Credentials Data Model v2.0
19:51:59 <Orie> +1
19:52:00 <mprorock> +1
19:52:01 <selfissued> -0
19:52:01 <TallTed> +1
19:52:02 <sb> +1
19:52:02 <kdeangs1> +1
19:52:03 <brentz> +1
19:52:03 <manu> +1
19:52:04 <decentra_> +1
19:52:07 <oliver> +1
19:52:08 <kristina_> 0
19:52:10 <Marty_Reed> +1
19:52:11 <Logan_Porter> +1
19:52:12 <dwaite> 0
19:52:17 <JoeAndrieu> +1
19:52:17 <shigeya> +0
19:52:28 <brentz> RESOLVED: We will publish Verifiable Credentials Data Model v1.1 as the FPWD for Verifiable Credentials Data Model v2.0
19:53:03 <kdeangs1> brentz: Anticipate having more work items. How do we best want to use time in this meeting versus others?
19:53:34 <kdeangs1> ... It's possible that the bulk of the work will happen in other meetings. How do people feel about that?
19:53:36 <manu> q+ to provide some ideas for architectural suggestions for v2.0.
19:53:44 <brentz> ack manu
19:53:44 <Zakim> manu, you wanted to provide some ideas for architectural suggestions for v2.0.
19:54:05 <selfissued> q+
19:54:07 <kdeangs1> manu: There are a couple things that have been stewing for a while. Need architectural discussions. How are crypto suites related to each other?
19:54:32 <kdeangs1> ... There are things we need to change, such as name and description of a VC in the first iteration.
19:55:03 <kdeangs1> ... Talking about priorities for non-normative work items, might be good to go through charter, ask people where they feel their priorities lie.
19:55:21 <kdeangs1> ... Also have a number of issues that have been backing up that chairs and editors can address.
19:55:45 <brentz> ack selfissued
19:55:48 <kdeangs1> ... Some VC housekeeping things, need to discuss where they go on the roadmap.
19:56:05 <kdeangs1> selfissued: All of the special topic groups should report progress into the main call.
19:56:10 <brentz> huge +1 on reporting in the main call
19:56:13 <kdeangs1> ... Main call becomes the coordination point.
19:56:17 <mprorock> +1 selfissued
19:57:00 <Orie> +1 feels the main call should always be about the main data model spec.
19:57:13 <kristina_> thank you!
19:57:14 <kdeangs1> brentz: Group will still cover topics of interest to group as a whole.
19:57:20 <manu> +1, great work kdeangs1 ! :)
19:57:31 <mprorock> mprorock has left #vcwg
19:57:39 <brentz> zakim, who is here?
19:57:39 <Zakim> Present: brentz, mprorock, Logan_Porter, shigeya, manu, decentralgabe, selfissued, Orie, dwaite, kristina_, oliver_terbu, JoeAndrieu
19:57:41 <Zakim> On IRC I see decentra_, dmitriz_, Marty_Reed, JoeAndrieu, sb, oliver, TallTed, justin_r, awhitehead, kdeangs1, kristina_, dwaite, Orie, selfissued, Logan_Porter, RRSAgent, Zakim,
19:57:41 <Zakim> ... brentz, shigeya, tzviya, manu, dlongley, dlehn, dlehn1, cel[m], rhiaro, hadleybeeman, bigbluehat, stonematt, cel, wayne, juancaballero
19:57:55 <brentz> present+ kdeangs1
19:58:07 <brentz> present+ dmitriz_
19:58:09 <TallTed> present+
19:58:16 <cel[m]> regrets+
19:58:32 <brentz> present+ justin_r
19:59:00 <brentz> zakim, end meeting
19:59:00 <Zakim> As of this point the attendees have been brentz, mprorock, Logan_Porter, shigeya, manu, decentralgabe, selfissued, Orie, dwaite, kristina_, oliver_terbu, JoeAndrieu, kdeangs1,
19:59:03 <Zakim> ... dmitriz_, TallTed, justin_r
19:59:03 <Zakim> RRSAgent, please draft minutes
19:59:03 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2022/07/20-vcwg-minutes.html Zakim
19:59:05 <Zakim> I am happy to have been of service, brentz; please remember to excuse RRSAgent.  Goodbye
19:59:09 <Zakim> Zakim has left #vcwg
19:59:13 <brentz> rrsagent, bye
19:59:13 <RRSAgent> I see no action items