18:51:20 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #vcwg
18:51:24 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2023/04/12-vcwg-irc
18:51:26 <brentz> zakim, start the meeting
18:51:27 <Zakim> RRSAgent, make logs Public
18:51:28 <Zakim> please title this meeting ("meeting: ..."), brentz
18:51:42 <brentz> meeting: Verifiable Credentials Weekly Teleconference
18:51:48 <brentz> chair: Brent Zundel
18:52:13 <brentz> present+
18:58:13 <PhilF> PhilF has joined #vcwg
18:59:03 <Orie> Orie has joined #vcwg
19:00:01 <mprorock> mprorock has joined #vcwg
19:01:56 <selfissued> selfissued has joined #vcwg
19:02:02 <selfissued> present+
19:02:22 <JoeAndrieu> JoeAndrieu has joined #vcwg
19:04:08 <oliver_> oliver_ has joined #vcwg
19:04:13 <oliver_> present+
19:04:14 <Phil-ASU> Phil-ASU has joined #vcwg
19:04:34 <Phil-ASU> present+
19:04:36 <Phil-ASU> scribe+
19:04:52 <PhilF> present+
19:04:56 <dlehn> present+
19:04:57 <dlongley> present+
19:04:58 <Orie> present+
19:05:00 <brentz> Topic: Agenda Review, Introductions, Announcements
19:05:08 <manu> present+
19:05:17 <Kerri_Lemoie> Kerri_Lemoie has joined #vcwg
19:05:25 <Kerri_Lemoie> present+
19:05:46 <Phil-ASU> brentz: below 80 issues for the first time in a while
19:06:04 <Phil-ASU> Intros, changes etc?
19:07:03 <Phil-ASU> Michael: Friday was last day at Microsoft. Looking at other options, will continue to participate in this working group. Will continue consulting in identity and security and open to conversations.
19:07:13 <decentralgabe> decentralgabe has joined #vcwg
19:07:19 <decentralgabe> present+
19:08:45 <Phil-ASU> Brentz: TPAC coming in Sept. 11-15 in Seville Spain. Haven't decided on meetings yet. Friday sundown on the 15th is a Jewish holiday, please advise the chairs if this is an issue
19:09:10 <Phil-ASU> Brentz: any other agenda suggestions or changes?
19:09:19 <brentz> Topic: Proposals
19:10:20 <brentz> Proposal: This working group will use Echidna to publish all formal TR publications, whenever applicable per the W3C publication rules.
19:10:25 <manu> +1
19:10:28 <decentralgabe> +1
19:10:29 <JoeAndrieu> +1
19:10:30 <Phil-ASU> Brentz: first proposal Brentz will run. A tool called Echidna what it does once a doc becomes a FDWD it will re:publish the document goingforward.
19:10:33 <Orie> +1
19:10:35 <dlongley> +1
19:10:45 <PhilF> +1
19:10:51 <brentz> +1
19:10:59 <mprorock> +1
19:10:59 <stenr> present+
19:11:02 <Phil-ASU> brentz:  Proposal: This working group will use Echidna to publish all formal TR publications, whenever applicable per the W3C publication rules.
19:11:10 <selfissued> +1 Agreeing with Orie ;-)
19:11:17 <dlehn> +1
19:11:56 <brentz> RESOLVED: This working group will use Echidna to publish all formal TR publications, whenever applicable per the W3C publication rules.
19:12:04 <Phil-ASU> Brentz: no objects
19:12:18 <Phil-ASU> s/objects/objections
19:13:09 <Phil-ASU> Brentz: first working drafts for ECDMA and EDCMA cryptoscripts are ready to be published to alert re: patents, etc.
19:13:20 <brentz> PROPOSAL: Publish the EdDSA Data Integrity Cryptosuite (https://w3c.github.io/vc-di-eddsa/FPWD/2023-04-18/) as a First Public Working Draft with a short name of `vc-di-eddsa` with a target publication date of April 18th 2023.
19:13:36 <manu> +1
19:13:39 <dlongley> +1
19:13:43 <PhilF> +1
19:13:46 <brentz> +1
19:13:48 <JoeAndrieu> +1
19:13:49 <dlehn> +1
19:13:56 <decentralgabe> +1
19:13:57 <oliver_> +1
19:13:57 <Orie> 0
19:13:58 <stenr> 0
19:14:07 <mprorock> +1
19:14:36 <brentz> RESOLVED: Publish the EdDSA Data Integrity Cryptosuite (https://w3c.github.io/vc-di-eddsa/FPWD/2023-04-18/) as a First Public Working Draft with a short name of `vc-di-eddsa` with a target publication date of April 18th 2023.
19:14:56 <brentz> PROPOSAL: Publish the ECDSA Data Integrity Cryptosuite (https://w3c.github.io/vc-di-ecdsa/FPWD/2023-04-18/) as a First Public Working Draft with a short name of `vc-di-ecdsa` with a target publication date of April 18th 2023.
19:15:06 <decentralgabe> +1
19:15:07 <oliver_> +1
19:15:08 <PhilF> +1
19:15:08 <dlongley> +1
19:15:08 <manu> +1
19:15:11 <JoeAndrieu> +1
19:15:14 <stenr> 0
19:15:18 <brentz> +1
19:15:19 <mprorock> +1
19:15:20 <Phil-ASU> Brentz: for ECDSA poll for acceptance
19:15:20 <cel> present+
19:15:24 <cel> present+ dmitriz
19:15:27 <dlehn> +1
19:15:33 <Orie> 0
19:15:38 <cel> +1
19:15:51 <brentz> RESOLVED: Publish the ECDSA Data Integrity Cryptosuite (https://w3c.github.io/vc-di-ecdsa/FPWD/2023-04-18/) as a First Public Working Draft with a short name of `vc-di-ecdsa` with a target publication date of April 18th 2023.
19:16:02 <manu> q+
19:16:08 <brentz> ack manu
19:16:16 <Phil-ASU> Brentz: no objects for either EdDSA or ECDSA - both approved and resolved
19:17:15 <Phil-ASU> Manu: any statuslist2021  - would there be any objections for proposal next week for polling
19:17:30 <brentz> Topic: Work Item status updates/PRs
19:17:34 <Phil-ASU> Brentz: no objections heard to Manu's question.
19:17:46 <manu> q+
19:17:54 <brentz> ack manu
19:18:04 <manu> subtopic: https://github.com/w3c/vc-data-model/pull/1082
19:18:10 <Phil-ASU> Brentz: time box 10 mins. for the PRs
19:18:46 <Phil-ASU> Manu: PR1082 - please take a look at it.  Has to do with PRs that are old and haven't received attention
19:18:56 <manu> subtopic: https://github.com/w3c/vc-specs-dir/pull/14
19:19:35 <Phil-ASU> Manu:  VC Specifications dir. PR for media extension vocab, and has had much conversation. An attemp to figure out ADCD, JWT and Gordian etc.
19:20:14 <Phil-ASU> Manu: the VC Spec Dir  needs guidance.  Should it be a note or registry thing or what for another 3 months and publish to PR space.  Guidance requested
19:20:25 <decentralgabe> q+ for vc json schema
19:20:27 <Orie> q+
19:20:34 <brentz> ack decentralgabe
19:20:34 <Zakim> decentralgabe, you wanted to discuss vc json schema
19:20:35 <Phil-ASU> Brentz: so noted and will be brought up.
19:20:42 <decentralgabe> https://github.com/w3c/vc-json-schema
19:20:54 <Phil-ASU> Gabe: work item for JSON Schema has been moved to the CCG
19:21:02 <Orie> https://github.com/w3c-ccg/vc-di-bbs/pull/72
19:21:03 <brentz> ack Orie
19:21:23 <decentralgabe> s/to the CCG/from the CCG to the VCWG
19:21:31 <Phil-ASU> Ori: pull request prepared for VC BBS has been pulled in and needs to be merged as PR.
19:22:22 <Phil-ASU> Ori: for VC JWT request for FTWD made and resolved in a previous meeting. Follow ups to possible objections made but it doesn't appear there will be objections. Go forward and prosper.
19:22:37 <Orie> https://github.com/w3c/vc-jwt/pull/68
19:22:49 <brentz> subtopic: https://github.com/w3c/vc-jwt/pull/68
19:22:55 <cel> s/FTWD/FPWD/
19:23:34 <Phil-ASU> Ori: Open pull request for vc-jwt. Some awkward sections cut from ver. 1.  Have added around that some vision for enhancements and improvements for securing JSON-LD with JWTs but structure of doc difficult to revise
19:24:16 <selfissued> q+
19:24:59 <Phil-ASU> Manu: almost of the opinion to not do a PR for JWT until its in a shape for all to see it in.  The specific concerns are the way the transformation algorithm is stated is non-testable. Why are we discussion something that is optional
19:25:22 <Phil-ASU> Manu: what are we doing with transformation algorithms, are the testable, etc.
19:26:34 <dlongley> +1 to the idea that there's a lot that needs to change in the VC-JWT document to reach consensus and make something usable, but FPWD can happen first
19:26:54 <Phil-ASU> Orie: there are many things that need work in the PR.  Media type discussion in the vc specs dir, and the securing specs referring to them, etc.
19:26:55 <manu> I'm not super concerned either way, but would prefer we get it in better shape before FPWD, but we can also do that after FPWD.
19:27:26 <brentz> q+ to read process
19:27:34 <Phil-ASU> Orie: mappings and intrepretations of the mapping in the core model and in the spec dir are differing....
19:27:46 <brentz> ack selfissued
19:27:53 <Phil-ASU> Orie: anything that needs done in this context?
19:28:16 <Phil-ASU> Michael: supports the recommendation that Orie prepare it before it becomes a working draft
19:28:19 <brentz> ack brentz
19:28:19 <Zakim> brentz, you wanted to read process
19:29:13 <Phil-ASU> Brentz: process info -- publishing as a FWD has patent implications. Working drafts do not represent a consensus of the WG beyond an agreement to work on the topic.
19:29:52 <Phil-ASU> Brentz: starts the clock on patent disclosures and says its a tech we as a working group want to pursue.
19:30:13 <JoeAndrieu> q+ to say I think we should either be FPWD land or in editor's draft land
19:30:39 <brentz> ack JoeAndrieu
19:30:39 <Zakim> JoeAndrieu, you wanted to say I think we should either be FPWD land or in editor's draft land
19:30:50 <Phil-ASU> Brentz: encourages folks to look through the PR that Orie has drafted, if something causes concern look for an issue that is already open on it, consider raising it later
19:31:31 <Orie> I agree with JoeAndrieu, its not clear what you want me to do
19:31:35 <Phil-ASU> Joe: Sounds like it's both a working draft and editor's draft
19:31:35 <dlongley> +1 to brent's suggestion
19:31:39 <Orie> happy to do whatever.
19:31:49 <manu>  +1 to "Orie go for it, we'll review, then FPWD" -- and time box the review to a week so people can't hold it up.
19:31:51 <PhilF> +1 to Orie getting it squared away first
19:31:57 <Phil-ASU> Brentz: should we ask Orie to finish it and then review the FPWD?
19:32:31 <Phil-ASU> Brentz: no objections to Orie shaping the document as an editor and presenting it to the group.
19:32:47 <Phil-ASU> Orie: next time does Orie need to wait 7 days or what?
19:33:52 <Phil-ASU> Brentz: with the work mode proposed Orie should be able raise PRs people think are needed. Concerns can be tracked in the issue.
19:34:20 <brentz> Topic: Issue Discussion
19:34:29 <brentz> https://github.com/w3c/vc-data-model/issues?q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+sort%3Aupdated-asc+no%3Aassignee+
19:34:43 <Phil-ASU> Brentz: we will follow the list of issues at the link ^^^
19:35:03 <Phil-ASU> Brentz: First issue #1044
19:35:07 <brentz> subtopic: https://github.com/w3c/vc-data-model/issues/1044
19:35:16 <dlongley> q+
19:35:23 <Phil-ASU> Brentz: do we have to introduce the credential class in the vc vocab?
19:35:26 <manu> q+ to close
19:35:31 <brentz> ack dlongley
19:35:34 <manu> q-
19:35:44 <Phil-ASU> Dave: suggests it be closed and don't need a resolution to do this.
19:35:46 <manu> +1 to close, that we've come to a resolution NOT to define Credential.
19:35:51 <Orie> +1 dlongley
19:35:55 <Phil-ASU> Brentz: marked as pending closed based on that recommendation
19:36:15 <brentz> subtopic: https://github.com/w3c/vc-data-model/issues/1046
19:36:21 <Phil-ASU> Brentz: Issue #1046
19:36:25 <decentralgabe> q+ to talk about versions
19:36:29 <brentz> ack decentralgabe
19:36:29 <Zakim> decentralgabe, you wanted to talk about versions
19:36:36 <Phil-ASU> Brentz: add a unique version property to the data model
19:37:18 <Phil-ASU> Gabe: useful to have a unique version model to track it.  There isn't anything that points it to a particular specification.
19:37:34 <manu> q+ to suggest that since this is JSON-LD now, and we have a context value, that is our version identifier.
19:37:36 <Phil-ASU> Brentz: would Gabe take on this issue?
19:37:41 <brentz> ack manu
19:37:41 <Zakim> manu, you wanted to suggest that since this is JSON-LD now, and we have a context value, that is our version identifier.
19:37:41 <Phil-ASU> Gabe: yes!
19:37:54 <dlongley> q+ to agree with manu and say other representations that map to the core model can do whatever they want
19:38:03 <TallTed> TallTed has joined #vcwg
19:38:17 <brentz> ack dlongley
19:38:17 <Zakim> dlongley, you wanted to agree with manu and say other representations that map to the core model can do whatever they want
19:38:17 <Phil-ASU> Manu: core data model is JSON-LD has an @context value is the version identifier. A separate unique version isn't needed.
19:38:49 <Phil-ASU> Dave: +1 to Manu's observation/recommendation. Should close it. Core data model doesn't need it.
19:38:55 <brentz> subtopic: https://github.com/w3c/vc-data-model/issues/1060
19:38:59 <Phil-ASU> Brentz: issue #1066
19:39:15 <Phil-ASU> Brentz: Does calling something verifiable imply a proof is associated with it?
19:39:30 <Phil-ASU> Brenz: anyone want to be assigned to this issue?
19:39:40 <Orie> q+
19:39:46 <brentz> ack Orie
19:39:53 <TallTed> present+
19:40:19 <dlongley> +1 to orie that we've hashed this out elsewhere and +1 to close
19:40:28 <Phil-ASU> Orie: this seems to be a straggler left over from media type discussion. Calling something verifiable doesn't tell you anything about. vc+ld+json doesn't tell you if it does or does not contain a proof
19:40:31 <TallTed> RRSAgent, draft minutes
19:40:33 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/04/12-vcwg-minutes.html TallTed
19:40:40 <manu> +1 to orie and dlongley
19:40:49 <TallTed> s/issue #1066/issue #1060/
19:40:51 <TallTed> Zakim, who's here?
19:40:51 <Zakim> Present: brentz, selfissued, oliver_, Phil-ASU, PhilF, dlehn, dlongley, Orie, manu, Kerri_Lemoie, decentralgabe, stenr, cel, dmitriz, TallTed
19:40:53 <Zakim> On IRC I see TallTed, decentralgabe, Kerri_Lemoie, Phil-ASU, oliver_, JoeAndrieu, selfissued, mprorock, Orie, PhilF, RRSAgent, Zakim, brentz, gkellogg_, dlehn, cel, dlongley,
19:40:53 <Zakim> ... csarven, rhiaro, stenr, manu, shigeya, w3c_modbot, ounfacdo, saysaywhat, npd, cel[h], bumblefudge1, cel[m], Github, bumblefudge, stonematt, Dongwoo, bigbluehat, hadleybeeman
19:41:03 <Phil-ASU> Orie: can't infer anything from vc+ld+json about presence or absence of a proof
19:41:37 <Phil-ASU> Brentz: are issues open to address updating terminology - no objections to mark as pending close
19:41:50 <brentz> subtopic: https://github.com/w3c/vc-data-model/issues/1047
19:41:55 <Phil-ASU> Brentz: issue #1047
19:42:19 <Orie> Doing a terminology review
19:42:29 <Orie> and citing terminology issues, is a great way to start contributing!
19:42:46 <Phil-ASU> Topic is " NIST defines "credential" differently #1047 "
19:42:59 <Phil-ASU> Brentz: anyone who wishes to be assigned to this issue?
19:43:01 <cel> sure
19:43:05 <cel> (can't speak)
19:43:21 <cel> clehner
19:43:32 <cel> cheers
19:43:35 <Phil-ASU> Brentz: Charles in the chat will be assigned to it (voice not available)
19:43:43 <brentz> subtopic: https://github.com/w3c/vc-data-model/issues/939
19:43:50 <Phil-ASU> Brentz: issue #939
19:44:22 <Phil-ASU> Brentz: Potential improvements to section "5.8 Zero-Knowledge Proofs
19:44:29 <manu> q+ to mark as pending close and ping sebastian.
19:44:37 <TallTed> q+
19:44:42 <brentz> ack manu
19:44:42 <Zakim> manu, you wanted to mark as pending close and ping sebastian.
19:44:47 <oliver_> +1 brentz
19:44:49 <Phil-ASU> Brentz: recommendation that it be marked as pending closed because some have been made and has had no objections
19:45:09 <Phil-ASU> Manu: Sebastian was asking about salted claims (?)
19:45:11 <brentz> ack TallTed
19:46:02 <Phil-ASU> TallTed: what was noted is that PR1030 will be merged soon so nothing for Sebastian to review yet. Brent will mark it closed and alert Sebastian
19:46:10 <Phil-ASU> Brentz: issue #1-70
19:46:11 <brentz> subtopic: https://github.com/w3c/vc-data-model/issues/1070
19:46:11 <Github> https://github.com/w3c/verifiable-credentials/issues/1 : Browser APIs would be unethical
19:46:22 <Phil-ASU> issue #1070
19:46:22 <TallTed> s/closed and alert Sebastian/pending close and alert Sebastian/
19:48:02 <stenr> q+
19:48:12 <Phil-ASU> Brentz:  Brent raised this issue - we're using a production environment using real VCs without real date in them. Should this be clearly indicated?  Verifiers should not trust it if presented to a verifier.
19:48:13 <brentz> ack stenr
19:48:22 <JoeAndrieu> Isn't feature freeze in effect?
19:48:25 <dlongley> q+
19:48:25 <decentralgabe> q+ to talk about trust
19:48:35 <oliver_> q+
19:48:39 <brentz> ack dlongley
19:48:41 <Phil-ASU> Stan: Is there a possibility of marking it as a particular type such as test?
19:48:58 <oliver_> q-
19:49:16 <Phil-ASU> Dave: would be worried about that suggestion. Best way is to have a different issuer if in a production environment.
19:49:19 <brentz> ack decentralgabe
19:49:19 <Zakim> decentralgabe, you wanted to talk about trust
19:49:31 <oliver_> q+
19:49:32 <Phil-ASU> Brentz: that doesn't work if you want to test trusting the issuer.
19:49:57 <brentz> ack oliver_
19:50:04 <Phil-ASU> Gabe: this is a larger trust issue. Should be up to a verifier.  Communicating level of trust to a verifier might be an interesting topic.
19:50:45 <Phil-ASU> Oliver: likes the credential type approach. Agrees with Dave that a production environment should have a different cert or something similar
19:51:04 <Phil-ASU> Brentz: likes suggestions made. Suggests moving it to the implementation guide for implementers.
19:51:18 <Phil-ASU> Brentz: issue #1063
19:51:18 <brentz> subtopic: https://github.com/w3c/vc-data-model/issues/1063
19:51:19 <dlongley> could be a mess with SD-style VCs ... where every one of them would have to say "you must disclose if this is a test credential or not" ... and so on -- lots of potential problems with independent claims / selective disclosure mechanisms
19:51:24 <Orie> q+
19:51:32 <brentz> ack Orie
19:51:33 <Phil-ASU> Can you use authn for holder bindings?
19:51:39 <manu> +1 to Orie, no you cannot, close issue.
19:52:04 <Phil-ASU> Orie: no you cannot. That's the answer. There are browser APIs if you're in a browser environment. Should close issue.
19:52:24 <Phil-ASU> Brentz: any objections to marking as pending closed.  No objections - marked pending close.
19:52:26 <brentz> subtopic: https://github.com/w3c/vc-data-model/issues/1074
19:52:31 <Phil-ASU> Brentz: issue #1074
19:53:04 <Phil-ASU> Brentz: Verifiable Credentials Vocabulary v2.0 not contains "name" and "description".
19:53:08 <Orie> name and description are not in https://www.w3.org/2018/credentials/
19:53:13 <Phil-ASU> Manu: i'll take it.
19:53:26 <brentz> subtopic: https://github.com/w3c/vc-data-model/issues/984
19:53:30 <Phil-ASU> Brentz: Manu assigned to it.
19:53:39 <selfissued> For the record, my new e-mail address is michael_b_jones@hotmail.com
19:54:02 <Phil-ASU> Brentz: issue #984 no one has commented on it. No one has asked to be assigned to it.
19:54:05 <TallTed> s/has an @context/has an `@context`/
19:54:12 <cel> i think the (b) there may have been what was called "the relying party"
19:54:15 <Phil-ASU> Brentz: what should we do?
19:54:18 <TallTed> RRSAgent, draft minutes
19:54:19 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/04/12-vcwg-minutes.html TallTed
19:54:38 <oliver_> q+
19:54:45 <brentz> ack oliver_
19:54:47 <Phil-ASU> Brentz: not for the day - looking like no action will be taken for #984
19:55:28 <stenr> q+
19:55:32 <oliver_> q-
19:55:34 <Phil-ASU> Oliver: wishes to be assigned to #984.
19:56:15 <stenr> q-
19:56:23 <Phil-ASU> Brentz: will be bothering for those not marked close. We're done. IIW next week!
19:57:15 <brentz> zakim, close the meeting
19:57:15 <Zakim> I don't understand 'close the meeting', brentz
19:57:21 <brentz> zakim, end the meeting
19:57:21 <Zakim> As of this point the attendees have been brentz, selfissued, oliver_, Phil-ASU, PhilF, dlehn, dlongley, Orie, manu, Kerri_Lemoie, decentralgabe, stenr, cel, dmitriz, TallTed
19:57:24 <Zakim> RRSAgent, please draft minutes
19:57:26 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/04/12-vcwg-minutes.html Zakim
19:57:32 <Zakim> I am happy to have been of service, brentz; please remember to excuse RRSAgent.  Goodbye
19:57:32 <Zakim> Zakim has left #vcwg
19:57:33 <brentz> rrsagent, bye
19:57:33 <RRSAgent> I see no action items