15:48:51 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #vcwg
15:48:51 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2022/12/14-vcwg-irc
15:48:53 <Zakim> RRSAgent, make logs Public
15:48:54 <Zakim> please title this meeting ("meeting: ..."), ivan
15:49:26 <ivan> Date: 2022-12-14
15:49:26 <ivan> Agenda: https://www.w3.org/events/meetings/3094a419-a55e-4608-aac1-6144804c5201/20221214T110000
15:49:26 <ivan> chair: kristina
15:49:26 <ivan> ivan has changed the topic to: Meeting Agenda 2022-12-14: https://www.w3.org/events/meetings/3094a419-a55e-4608-aac1-6144804c5201/20221214T110000
15:51:03 <brentz> brentz has joined #vcwg
15:58:40 <brentz> present+
15:58:47 <ivan> present+
15:59:16 <mprorock> mprorock has joined #vcwg
15:59:34 <ivan> present+ kristina
15:59:42 <ivan> present+ mprorock
16:00:39 <ivan> present+ Phil
16:00:48 <Phil> Phil has joined #vcwg
16:01:17 <ivan> present+ davidc
16:01:27 <ivan> present+ oliver
16:01:43 <ivan> present+ abramson
16:02:07 <ivan> present+ awhitehead
16:02:38 <ivan> present+ samsmith
16:02:46 <ivan> present+ manu
16:03:00 <ivan> present+ cabernet
16:03:05 <SamSmith> SamSmith has joined #vcwg
16:03:06 <ivan> present+ dlongley
16:03:10 <DavidC> DavidC has joined #vcwg
16:03:13 <cabernet> cabernet has joined #vcwg
16:03:13 <DavidC> present+
16:03:16 <cabernet> present+
16:03:17 <andrewwhitehead> andrewwhitehead has joined #vcwg
16:03:25 <kristina> kristina has joined #vcwg
16:04:09 <manu> present+
16:04:14 <ivan> present+ orie
16:04:25 <Orie> Orie has joined #vcwg
16:04:32 <Orie> present+
16:04:51 <oliver> oliver has joined #vcwg
16:04:53 <oliver> present+
16:04:54 <ivan> scribe+ phil
16:04:58 <kristina> present +
16:05:02 <kristina> present+
16:05:19 <wip> wip has joined #vcwg
16:05:56 <Phil> Kristina  - describes scribing for Phil to do.
16:06:03 <ivan> present+ dlehn
16:06:10 <ivan> present+ selfissued
16:06:44 <ivan> present+ tallted
16:06:46 <dmitriz> present+
16:07:05 <Phil> Ivan: just corrected phil's referencing of comments
16:07:27 <ivan> present+ brian
16:07:31 <Phil> Kristina: any one to reintroduce themselves?
16:07:41 <ivan> present+ JoeAndrieu
16:07:50 <Phil> Kristina: additions to the agenda?
16:08:36 <TallTed> TallTed has joined #vcwg
16:08:47 <ivan> Topic: F2F Meeting
16:08:48 <JoeAndrieu> JoeAndrieu has joined #vcwg
16:08:54 <Phil> Kristina: some new labels for issues being raised but not mature enough for specific discussion.
16:08:55 <ivan> present+ bumblefudge
16:08:58 <brentz> the new label is 'conversation'
16:09:12 <manu> Thank you for providing office space for the F2F meeting, Microsoft! :)
16:09:22 <Phil> Brentz: notes the new lable is 'conversation'
16:09:43 <Orie> q+
16:09:50 <Phil> Brentz: we'll need sponsors if lunch is desired.
16:10:02 <mprorock> brent - hit me up on lunch
16:10:19 <Phil> Kristina: for special topic calls the current plans is that we don't have them for the next 3 weeks.
16:11:00 <Phil> Kristina: the next special topics call is Jan 9th is to continue discussion @context optional related issues.
16:11:09 <ivan> Topic: `@context` issue
16:11:09 <manu> q+ for work item status update
16:11:17 <kristina> ack Orie
16:11:57 <Phil> Orie: has asked for link for a f2f agenda and meeting item components for meeting item agenda. Not ready yet but will be by Feb 14 to 16.
16:12:18 <TallTed> calendar needs update with Jan 9 call -- https://www.w3.org/groups/wg/vc/calendar
16:12:22 <kristina> ack manu
16:12:22 <Zakim> manu, you wanted to discuss work item status update
16:12:39 <ivan> Topic: status update
16:12:48 <kristina> F2F is planned for Feb 14-16
16:12:49 <manu> https://github.com/w3c/vc-data-model/pull/969
16:13:15 <Phil> Manu: status updates - VC Data Integrity no updates, Nontranfereable property, with good discussion on Special Issue call.
16:13:35 <TallTed> q+
16:13:38 <DavidC> q+
16:13:39 <Phil> Manu: not sure what to do about closing, wait for more comments
16:13:51 <kristina> ack TallTed
16:14:21 <Phil> TallTed: special topic call for the 9th isn't on the calendar and the 10th is cancelled. Need to correct this.  Calendar entry will be corrected.
16:14:29 <kristina> ack DavidC
16:15:08 <Phil> DavidC: use cases will put into the holder binding.
16:15:35 <Phil> DavidC: when we have new feature we can say it is reproduced or replaced by this new PR
16:15:58 <manu> https://github.com/w3c/vc-data-model/pull/987
16:16:01 <Phil> Manu: watch the holder binding discussion and is it ok to close this PR if it takes several weeks or months to resolve (969)
16:16:36 <Phil> Manu: PR 987 - request for an example from Orie - re Added PresentationSchema. David to provide an example two shortly
16:16:37 <ivan> q+
16:16:53 <kristina> ack ivan
16:17:03 <Phil> Ivan: this is a new property to go into the data model?
16:17:16 <Phil> DavidC: Yes that's correct, onlyl applied to Presentations
16:17:31 <Phil> Ivan: has to add this to the vocabulary
16:17:48 <Phil> DavidC: Property name is fixed, it will be an object with defs, and have a type and ID
16:18:11 <ivan> q+
16:18:33 <Phil> Manu: One thing everyone doing PR should be aware of there are three places - spec, the vocab, and JSON schema file and JSON-LD schema file
16:18:45 <Phil> Manu: four (4) things not 3.
16:18:53 <selfissued> selfissued has joined #vcwg
16:18:59 <kristina> ack ivan
16:18:59 <selfissued> present+
16:19:03 <selfissued> q+
16:19:28 <Phil> Ivan: for the vocab part would be nicer if they publish a procedure for the setup of the vocab.  A bit complicated - should be done in Jan.
16:19:36 <Phil> Manu: Yes, it's on the 'todo' list
16:19:36 <kristina> ack selfissued
16:19:57 <dmitriz> q+
16:20:05 <Phil> Mike: is JSON-LD schema in scope?
16:20:07 <mprorock> q+
16:20:19 <dmitriz> s/JSON-LD schema/JSON schema/
16:20:23 <kristina> s/JSON-LD schema/JSON schema
16:20:39 <ivan> s/JSON-LD schema/JSON schema/
16:20:45 <Phil> Manu: Yes, JSON schema added for the specification was added a few weeks ago and needs to be added
16:20:46 <Orie> I agree with selfissued, seems like this is going to be difficult to maintain... might have been nicer to do at the end.
16:20:57 <dlongley> +1 to freeze until the end
16:21:00 <kristina> ack dmitriz
16:21:29 <mprorock> https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-vocab
16:21:38 <Orie> Spruce also has tooling for that purpose.
16:21:43 <Phil> Dmitri: one way to reduce the complexity adding to 4 places is if we added a toolset to automate this. Orie has more tooling or others may have something.
16:21:44 <mprorock> +1
16:21:47 <kristina> ack mprorock
16:21:56 <dmitriz> +1 to freezing, too
16:21:57 <manu> q+ to move on and continue processing PRs.
16:22:00 <selfissued> q+
16:22:38 <TallTed> if it's frozen, it will need inline notation saying so, else our early adopters will be raising lots of issues (and may do so even with such notice)
16:22:42 <Phil> Mprorock: big fan of doing this once and highly in favor that approach but maintaining both things at once will get things out of sync
16:23:31 <Phil> Kristina: WG agreed to work on the schemas. Can we document the issues re: generating once and interate the updates
16:24:10 <Phil> Manu: will create an issue to automate the files we have to maintain so we only one to maintain.
16:24:52 <mprorock> +1 mike
16:24:59 <kristina> ack selfissued
16:25:03 <Phil> Mike: can someone put a note in the header for the schema that it is out of date and we're not going to maintain it until we do the one point of change to update all.
16:25:09 <kristina> ack manu
16:25:09 <Zakim> manu, you wanted to move on and continue processing PRs.
16:25:12 <mprorock> otherwise someone will think it is gospel and create a lot of work to undo
16:25:17 <manu> https://github.com/w3c/vc-data-model/pull/992
16:25:57 <Phil> Manu: PR992 - rename issuanceDate/expiration date from validFrom/ValidUntil comments in the PR with a number of corrections
16:26:13 <manu> https://github.com/w3c/vc-data-model/pull/993
16:26:25 <Phil> Manu PR993 add normative dependency on VC Data Integrity - oks there.
16:26:28 <manu> https://github.com/w3c/vc-data-model/pull/994
16:26:40 <cel> present+
16:26:52 <kristina> s/Manu/manu:
16:27:07 <Phil> Manu: PR994, a request to talk about URLs in the spec - slight bit of push back but no objections. A DID is a URL but it can be referenced in the issue
16:27:29 <kristina> q?
16:27:58 <kristina> Topic: StatusList2021 adoption
16:28:07 <Phil> Kristina: any other work item updates?  If not next item is StatusList 2021 adoption
16:28:32 <mccown> mccown has joined #vcwg
16:28:32 <kristina> q?
16:28:36 <Phil> Kristina: any comments before we put this up for adoption? <crickets>
16:28:38 <ivan> present+ smccown
16:29:05 <Phil> Kristina: no one on the queue
16:29:07 <cel> s/StatuList2021/StatusList2021/
16:29:16 <mprorock> q+
16:29:25 <kristina> ack mprorock
16:29:27 <JoeAndrieu> +1 to vc-status-list
16:29:30 <Phil> BrentZ: will put this up and Brent will not take offense if other names are preferred
16:29:35 <manu> q+
16:30:03 <Phil> Mprorock: Should we consider this as Status -
16:30:13 <Phil> Kristina: let's not discuss normative changes at this time.
16:30:31 <kristina> ack manu
16:31:22 <mprorock> good point - let's avoid that nightmare, sorry i mean that "extra complexity"
16:31:25 <brentz> I think a constrained scope for this item is a good idea
16:31:35 <Phil> Manu: concerned that we're concerned about what the spec is about - e.g., add talking about blockchain status, ZKP status, etc. that isn't what we're voting on today.  We should focus on just this VC StatusList
16:31:40 <Orie> Pretty sure the working group gets to decide what the thing is, after we pull it in... the WG controls the content of the document.
16:32:02 <mprorock> q+
16:32:05 <ivan> present+ cel
16:32:20 <dlongley> +1 to expect multiple versions over time
16:32:24 <Phil> Manu: concern with versioning VC StatusList2021 now but there will be multiple versions of this and we should start talking about it now.
16:32:26 <brentz> I think we handle versions in other work items without needing to modify the shortname
16:32:26 <manu> q+
16:32:33 <kristina> ack mprorock
16:32:44 <selfissued> q+
16:32:54 <ivan> q+
16:32:57 <Orie> +1 Mike
16:33:07 <kristina> ack manu
16:33:10 <Phil> Mprorock: reiterates his dislike for putting dates in names. Other ways to do this.  Perhaps the StatusList version might take care of this.
16:33:18 <manu> is this the spec we're talking about: https://w3c-ccg.github.io/vc-status-list-2021/
16:33:32 <kristina> ack selfissued
16:33:35 <decentralgabe> decentralgabe has joined #vcwg
16:33:38 <decentralgabe> present+
16:33:39 <Phil> Manu: should point to the spect we're pulling in -  https://w3c-ccg.github.io/vc-status-list-2021/
16:33:51 <kristina> ack ivan
16:33:52 <Orie> There are no JWT examples in that specification.
16:34:10 <Phil> Mike: Let's delete the date from the short name - to VCStatusList leaving out 2021 etc.
16:34:14 <mprorock> +1 orie - we will need to do some work to this
16:34:21 <manu> q+ to note W3C Process mechanism to pull spec in.
16:34:37 <kristina> ack manu
16:34:37 <Zakim> manu, you wanted to note W3C Process mechanism to pull spec in.
16:34:43 <Phil> Ivan: We're pulling this into the Rec track not a note - Kristina says "yes" that's what we're doing
16:35:16 <Phil> Manu: data model spec has status field but it makes sense to make it as separate specification. We need to make this logic clear on the record
16:35:31 <mprorock> +1 manu
16:35:45 <Phil> Ivan: if we want to do this we should not go for a public working draft this year because of the transition going on with W3C is too messy.
16:35:48 <mprorock> and big +1 to no fpwd this year
16:36:40 <kristina> q?
16:36:52 <brentz> PROPOSAL: The WG will adopt StatusList2021 (https://w3c-ccg.github.io/vc-status-list-2021/) as a recommendation track editors draft under the shortname vc-status-list
16:36:56 <ivan> +1
16:36:59 <selfissued> +1
16:36:59 <Phil> Ivan: putting something into the resolution is way too early at this point - just use draft under vc-status-list
16:37:00 <dlongley> +1
16:37:02 <mprorock> +1
16:37:08 <brentz> +1
16:37:09 <decentralgabe> +1
16:37:16 <ivan> s/something/echidna usage/
16:37:17 <oliver> +1
16:37:17 <manu> +1
16:37:17 <Orie> +0
16:37:20 <DavidC> +1
16:37:20 <cabernet> +1
16:37:20 <dlehn1> +1
16:37:20 <TallTed> +1
16:37:23 <Phil> Kristina: Should we proceed with this naming? (Vote)
16:37:24 <kristina> +1
16:37:31 <Phil> +1
16:37:36 <ivan> q+
16:37:38 <mccown> +1
16:37:50 <dmitriz> +1
16:38:07 <brentz> RESOLVED: The WG will adopt StatusList2021 (https://w3c-ccg.github.io/vc-status-list-2021/) as a recommendation track editors draft under the shortname vc-status-list
16:38:12 <Phil> Kristina: no -1's , one 0, hence declared adopted.
16:38:12 <kristina> ack ivan
16:38:32 <Phil> Ivan: does Ivan need to create a repository for it?
16:38:56 <Phil> Brentz: They will work out the details of this and Ivan can leave this until given direction.
16:38:57 <mprorock> CCG will standby for final community draft approval, etc
16:38:59 <kristina> Topic: Issue Discussion
16:38:59 <kristina> https://github.com/w3c/vc-data-model/issues?q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+label%3Adiscuss+sort%3Aupdated-asc
16:39:16 <kristina> Subtopic: https://github.com/w3c/vc-data-model/issues/966
16:39:25 <Phil> Kristina:  here's the topic to discuss - https://github.com/w3c/vc-data-model/issues?q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+label%3Adiscuss+sort%3Aupdated-asc
16:39:49 <Phil> Kristina: 966 - clarity sought on this
16:40:47 <manu> q+
16:40:48 <Phil> Ivan: in an idea world it would be a PR but it's a separate issue. Vocab for data model goes to the old v1 version of the vocab, and the proposal is to point it to version 2 which is maintained and in much better shape with V2 and backwards compatible. No downsides for doing it.
16:41:04 <kristina> ack manu
16:41:11 <Phil> Kristina: proceed with this suggestion
16:41:25 <Phil> Manu: strong support for doing this and moving it over.
16:41:46 <Phil> Ivan: no PR just going to the W3C website and hacking there!
16:41:51 <Orie> Noting that this issue is related to the questions about the "core data model"... its weird to not here objections to it from the folks seeking to make context optional.
16:42:21 <Phil> s/and hacking there/proceed with suggertion
16:42:44 <kristina> subtopic: https://github.com/w3c/vc-data-model/issues/930
16:43:36 <oliver> q+
16:43:38 <dmitriz> the other option would be to model delegation in the DID data model, instead of VC
16:43:43 <Phil> Gage: trying to familiarize with what's happened - mostly a distinction wanting to represent delegates in a credential rather than defining a new cryptographic mechanism
16:43:51 <oliver> q-
16:43:57 <dmitriz> s/Gage:/Gabe:/
16:44:23 <oliver> q+
16:44:29 <Phil> Gabe: how do we represent delegated relationships?  Want to show that someone is presenting a credential for a party who is not represented there.
16:44:30 <kristina> ack oliver
16:44:57 <dmitriz> and yet a third option would be to model delegation in a /separate/ VC, instead of in a single one.
16:45:27 <dlongley> q+ to ask if this issue could be turned into one or more use cases and closed
16:45:29 <Phil> Oliver: good example for the use case - might be specific type of holder binding.
16:45:30 <JoeAndrieu> q+ to talk about layers
16:45:48 <Phil> Oliver: believes it can be solved by the holder binding
16:45:51 <decentralgabe> q+ to distinguish between auth and relationship modeling
16:46:00 <kristina> ack dlongley
16:46:00 <Zakim> dlongley, you wanted to ask if this issue could be turned into one or more use cases and closed
16:46:03 <Phil> Kristina: concered with the scope of the holder binding
16:46:16 <Phil> Dave: can we turn this issue into one or more use cases and closed?
16:46:25 <kristina> ack JoeAndrieu
16:46:25 <Zakim> JoeAndrieu, you wanted to talk about layers
16:46:49 <Phil> Joe: second that notion specifying the use case independent of the solution is a good option.
16:47:25 <brentz> q+ to ask if the issue should be transferred to https://github.com/w3c/vc-use-cases
16:47:29 <Phil> Joe: Gabe's example has a bunch of claims but there should be the ability to say many things  - not a state of delegation itself.
16:47:53 <kristina> ack decentralgabe
16:47:53 <Zakim> decentralgabe, you wanted to distinguish between auth and relationship modeling
16:48:02 <decentralgabe> already exists https://github.com/w3c/vc-use-cases/issues/126
16:48:11 <brentz> q-
16:48:16 <Phil> Gabe: should be a statement about delegation and should be in the use cases. Joe might have made this comment at TPAC.
16:48:40 <Phil> Gabe: maybe the use case should come first and be referenced there.
16:49:00 <Phil> Gabe: will work on vc use case PR first
16:49:08 <kristina> Subtopic: https://github.com/w3c/vc-data-model/issues/860
16:50:50 <Phil> Joe: had in credential the issuer issued a mDL but nothing about the subject presenting the credential. Is the current presenter the same as the issuer gave the VC to
16:52:03 <Phil> Joe: use case individual claiming US citizenship, the birth certificate claims the relationship to his mother, but she's remarried and has changed her name. Need something to connect these changes.  This is me; this is my boss, my child, or simply I found this vc
16:52:30 <kristina> q?
16:52:34 <manu> q+
16:52:35 <Phil> Joe: how do we have a standard way to represent these complicated semantic relationships?  Having one would be helpful
16:52:50 <kristina> ack manu
16:52:54 <Phil> Kristina - perhaps we should think about this and return to it in January
16:53:09 <Phil> Manu: we should think more about this and provide a standard mechanism for representing this relationships
16:53:25 <dlongley> q+
16:53:37 <kristina> s/and return to it in January/though this issue has been opened back in Jan this year.
16:53:56 <Phil> Manu: we need concrete guidance for people who want to put these properties in the representation. It could be come a big conversation. We've only had a terms of use in a presentation to date.
16:54:12 <Phil> Manu: we'll need to approach this from a "use cases first" perspective.
16:54:25 <kristina> ack dlongley
16:54:27 <JoeAndrieu> q+ to support specific use cases, perhaps with specific vocabulary
16:54:27 <Phil> Manu: need to be very specific about the use cases.
16:55:32 <dmitriz> +1 to re-using existing VC primitive, vs introducing a new primitive of adding claims to VP
16:55:38 <Phil> Dave: we should try to leveage the primitives we already have. One way to do that is the VC. Given there is a lot complicated relationships and not have a highly complex reaasoning engine to process it we should releverage VCs where the kinds of relationships are modeled.  EG. give a parent child assertion yourself offered.
16:55:39 <kristina> q?
16:55:46 <kristina> ack JoeAndrieu
16:55:46 <Zakim> JoeAndrieu, you wanted to support specific use cases, perhaps with specific vocabulary
16:57:02 <dlongley> +1 to being able to say anything -- but there's a need for the verifier to know what they are saying as well, +1 to common vocabs and an easy way for the verifier to say what they will understand in the first place.
16:57:32 <Phil> Joe: a little confused by what Dave just said. VCs require a separate artifact and different from the flow. Should be an action of the prsentation. This is still "openworld" - should express this with some constrainted openworld. Need a vocab that expresses common relationships. Good to address nontransferrable property, etc. would help us get rid of babel problem but need to express things as the real world works.
16:58:03 <ivan> rrsagent, draft minutes
16:58:03 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2022/12/14-vcwg-minutes.html ivan
16:58:20 <Phil> Kristina: let's leave this conversation for further thought. Happy  New Year for everyone. We've made progress with new V2 WG and working on it.
16:58:39 <ivan> rrsagent, draft minutes
16:58:39 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2022/12/14-vcwg-minutes.html ivan
16:58:53 <ivan> zakim, end meeting
16:58:53 <Zakim> As of this point the attendees have been brentz, ivan, kristina, mprorock, Phil, davidc, oliver, abramson, awhitehead, samsmith, manu, cabernet, dlongley, orie, dlehn, selfissued,
16:58:56 <Zakim> ... tallted, dmitriz, brian, JoeAndrieu, bumblefudge, cel, smccown, decentralgabe
16:58:56 <Zakim> RRSAgent, please draft minutes
16:58:56 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2022/12/14-vcwg-minutes.html Zakim
16:58:58 <Zakim> I am happy to have been of service, ivan; please remember to excuse RRSAgent.  Goodbye
16:59:02 <Zakim> Zakim has left #vcwg
17:21:22 <Karen> Karen has joined #vcwg
19:00:00 <dmitriz> dmitriz has joined #vcwg