14:52:55 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #did-methods
14:53:00 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2024/09/25-did-methods-irc
14:53:00 <tpac-breakout-bot> RRSAgent, do not leave
14:53:01 <tpac-breakout-bot> RRSAgent, make logs public
14:53:02 <tpac-breakout-bot> Meeting: DID Method Standardization
14:53:02 <tpac-breakout-bot> Chair: mandyvenables, Manu Sporny, Gabe Cohen, Kim Duffy
14:53:02 <tpac-breakout-bot> Agenda: https://github.com/w3c/tpac2024-breakouts/issues/38
14:53:02 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #did-methods
14:53:03 <tpac-breakout-bot> Zakim, clear agenda
14:53:03 <Zakim> agenda cleared
14:53:03 <tpac-breakout-bot> Zakim, agenda+ Pick a scribe
14:53:04 <Zakim> agendum 1 added
14:53:04 <tpac-breakout-bot> Zakim, agenda+ Reminders: code of conduct, health policies, recorded session policy
14:53:04 <Zakim> agendum 2 added
14:53:04 <tpac-breakout-bot> Zakim, agenda+ Goal of this session
14:53:05 <Zakim> agendum 3 added
14:53:05 <tpac-breakout-bot> Zakim, agenda+ Discussion
14:53:05 <Zakim> agendum 4 added
14:53:05 <tpac-breakout-bot> Zakim, agenda+ Next steps / where discussion continues
14:53:08 <Zakim> agendum 5 added
14:53:08 <tpac-breakout-bot> tpac-breakout-bot has left #did-methods
16:56:27 <manu_> manu_ has joined #did-methods
16:56:42 <manu_> Meeting: DID Method Standardization
17:00:03 <GeunHyung> GeunHyung has joined #did-methods
17:02:36 <dlehn> dlehn has joined #did-methods
17:03:27 <lambda> lambda has joined #did-methods
17:06:32 <GeunHyung> GeunHyung has left #did-methods
17:06:57 <kaz> kaz has joined #did-methods
17:07:28 <decentralgabe> decentralgabe has joined #did-methods
17:07:54 <bigbluehat> bigbluehat has joined #did-methods
17:07:59 <kaz> present+ Kaz_Ashimura
17:08:04 <kaz> rrsagent, make log public
17:08:05 <bigbluehat> present+
17:08:08 <kaz> rrsagent, draft minutes
17:08:09 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/09/25-did-methods-minutes.html kaz
17:08:50 <bigbluehat> scribe+
17:08:56 <bigbluehat> manu_: what is a DID Method?
17:09:14 <bigbluehat> ... there are different methods that use various protocols, etc.
17:09:22 <mandyv> mandyv has joined #did-methods
17:09:24 <bigbluehat> ... there are over 200 DID methods
17:09:28 <bigbluehat> ... some see that as a benefit
17:09:31 <bigbluehat> ... others as a concern
17:09:33 <Geun-Hyung3> Geun-Hyung3 has joined #did-methods
17:09:35 <bigbluehat> ... we'll talk about that today
17:09:37 <Isaac7> Isaac7 has joined #did-methods
17:09:53 <bigbluehat> ... there are over 16 million people using DIDs today
17:10:12 <bigbluehat> ... first up, BlueSky. It's a decentralized social network
17:10:27 <bigbluehat> ... they have over 10 million DIDs deployed
17:10:38 <bigbluehat> ... this caught us a bit by suprise
17:10:57 <bigbluehat> ... but as people move from other networks to alternative options, that number continues to grow
17:11:05 <bigbluehat> ... Next, is the TruAge program
17:11:27 <bigbluehat> ... this is typically used in convenience stores
17:11:54 <bigbluehat> ... there are several hundred thousand issued across the country
17:12:09 <bigbluehat> ... they're used whenever an age verification is done with the TruAge application
17:12:15 <bigbluehat> ... up to millions of times a day
17:12:21 <bigbluehat> ... Next, CA CMV
17:12:25 <decentralgabe> present+
17:12:29 <Rachel> Rachel has joined #did-methods
17:12:44 <Rachel> present+ Rachel_Yager
17:12:47 <bigbluehat> ... 600k+ have DID's with about 1.2k per day being added
17:13:17 <bigbluehat> ... they use `did:key` and `did:web`
17:13:33 <bigbluehat> ... Next, US Citizenship and Immigration Services
17:14:11 <bigbluehat> ... they are readying `did:web` deployment with some features pulled into `did:tdw` to make things more trustworthy
17:14:23 <bigbluehat> ... they've already confirmed they will be using DIDs and VCs
17:14:38 <bigbluehat> ... for things like permanent residence cards, etc.
17:15:09 <bigbluehat> decentralgabe: Bhutan's National Digital Identity group is using `did:sov`
17:15:19 <bigbluehat> ... this is a neat example of nation-wide adoption
17:15:36 <bigbluehat> ... Next, EBSI, the European Blockchain
17:16:00 <bigbluehat> ... member states can use the `did:ebsi` and individuals to use `did:key`
17:16:12 <bigbluehat> ... this can be used across borders
17:16:30 <bigbluehat> ... with the plan that these will be available to all Europeans as an identity option in the coming years.
17:16:39 <wes-smith2> wes-smith2 has joined #did-methods
17:16:40 <bigbluehat> ... Next, Block, this is my company
17:17:06 <bigbluehat> ... we're working to use `did:dht`, `did:web`, and `did:jwk`
17:17:21 <bigbluehat> ... these will potential be used in Cash App, Square, etc.
17:17:45 <bigbluehat> ... Here are some others: Privado ID, Dock, Cheqd, Walt.id
17:17:58 <bigbluehat> ... this is a flurishing ecosystem
17:18:28 <bigbluehat> ... we don't have specific data on these, but a rough estimate would be hundreds of thousands of transactions
17:18:55 <bigbluehat> ... Here are a few more, Microsoft Entra, Trinsic, IOTA Identity Framework, and GLIEF
17:19:20 <bigbluehat> ... Entra is used with LinkedIn for verified profiles
17:19:36 <bigbluehat> manu_: as we can see, DIDs are being adopted
17:19:46 <bigbluehat> ... but, as ever, there are challenges
17:19:55 <bigbluehat> ... why should we define methods at the W3C?
17:20:09 <bigbluehat> ... many of these nation states and government orgs need SDO support
17:20:20 <bigbluehat> ... others are looking for statements of adoption
17:20:21 <bumblefudge> bumblefudge has joined #did-methods
17:20:37 <bigbluehat> ... many W3C members are looking for at least a few being standardized
17:20:47 <bigbluehat> ... and there are 200+ methods out there
17:21:17 <bigbluehat> ... and would help the community to know the difference between ones with strong commitments, standards, and community vs. those that were just weekend projexts
17:21:23 <bigbluehat> s/projexts/projects
17:22:17 <bigbluehat> ... the W3C Credentials Community Group and the Decentralized Identity Foundation and the IOTA Foundations have recently started an effort to promote standardization
17:22:28 <denkeni> denkeni has joined #did-methods
17:22:41 <bigbluehat> ... so there's wide support for this effort and they are also supporting active incubation of various methods
17:22:46 <bumblefudge> One DIF workstream worth mentioning to the uninitiated is the Identity and Discovery WG (informally the "DID Method Working Group") : https://identity.foundation/working-groups/identifiers-discovery.html
17:22:57 <bigbluehat> decentralgabe: we just did our first call last week and there is huge interest
17:23:04 <bumblefudge> lots of history of did method design and assessment/evaluation there going back 5 years
17:23:04 <bigbluehat> ... we're working on determining categories of use
17:23:19 <bigbluehat> ... we're not here to gate keep
17:23:24 <hyojin_> hyojin_ has joined #did-methods
17:23:34 <bumblefudge> (including the DID Traits work item)
17:23:39 <bigbluehat> ... but we do need to start promoting the ones that want to be standardized and help them to a different level of usability
17:23:55 <bigbluehat> ... W3C, DIF, etc. are all great options for getting these standardized
17:24:10 <bigbluehat> ... there are ephemeral DID methods
17:24:21 <bigbluehat> ... there are DNS dependent ones like `did:web`
17:24:45 <bigbluehat> ... and truly decentralized ones like `did:dht` and those that use blockchains
17:25:18 <bigbluehat> manu_: today we'd like to hear from the room about what would be wanted in terms of requirements for this standardization process, etc.
17:25:33 <bigbluehat> ... so, `did:web` is one that we might standardize here because it's webby
17:25:53 <bigbluehat> ... but the ephemeral methods like `did:key` don't take much standardization
17:26:17 <bigbluehat> ... but then there are harder ones like "what does a truly decentralized did method look like?"
17:26:24 <bigbluehat> ... should it use a blockchain?
17:26:42 <bigbluehat> ... blockchains have not received a warm reception at the W3C
17:27:02 <bigbluehat> ... and then there are all the various methods that have a wide range of deployment and use numbers
17:27:15 <bigbluehat> ... we're also looking for what things folks might object to?
17:27:23 <bumblefudge> https://identity.foundation/did-traits/
17:27:42 <bigbluehat> q?
17:27:51 <rigo> rigo has joined #did-methods
17:27:51 <phila> phila has joined #did-methods
17:27:52 <TallTed> TallTed has joined #did-methods
17:27:57 <KevinDean> KevinDean has joined #did-methods
17:27:59 <KevinDean> 1+
17:28:01 <KevinDean> q+
17:28:04 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #did-methods
17:28:16 <gkellogg> present+
17:28:25 <bigbluehat> Mike Jones: in the DID WG from earlier, we could not get consensus for chartering for DID methods
17:28:33 <bigbluehat> ... so, I'd love to see it happen now
17:28:35 <JakeJones> JakeJones has joined #did-methods
17:28:48 <bigbluehat> ... but why do we think we can get it through chartering this time when we couldn't before?
17:29:13 <bigbluehat> manu_: great question. The earlier objections were around that particular group holding that charter
17:29:19 <Rachel> Rachel has joined #did-methods
17:29:24 <bigbluehat> ... the feeling was that group must remain agnostic to the method creation
17:29:40 <rigo> q+ to talk about digital product passports, gaia-x and IDSA
17:29:48 <bigbluehat> ... and at that time those same members did and still do support a separate group from doing the method standardization
17:29:54 <bumblefudge> q+
17:29:57 <bigbluehat> ... the goal was to keep those separate
17:30:03 <manu_> q+ janina
17:30:06 <decentralgabe> ack KevinDean
17:30:07 <bigbluehat> ... which is what this approach now should address
17:30:10 <rigo> q- later
17:30:33 <bigbluehat> KevinDean: when we started looking into VCs, DIDs came along for the ride at my company
17:30:46 <bigbluehat> ... we went with `did:web` "for now" but want something more robust
17:31:06 <bigbluehat> ... so if we're going to formally specifying DID methods, I'd like to see them kept simple
17:31:17 <bigbluehat> ... prototyping is important, but support is key
17:31:39 <bigbluehat> ... and I'm concerned we won't be able to provide that support
17:31:56 <bigbluehat> ... DID Traits may help with exploration
17:32:13 <bigbluehat> ... but we'll have to draw a line that doesn't tread on the toes of solution providers
17:32:32 <bigbluehat> ... maybe a supplemental approach would be a certification process
17:32:37 <bigbluehat> q?
17:32:41 <manu_> ack bumblefudge
17:32:57 <bigbluehat> bumblefudge: my question is in the spirit of fretting and worst-casing
17:32:57 <wschi> wschi has joined #did-methods
17:33:04 <bigbluehat> ... what is the timeline on the DID resolution spec?
17:33:15 <wschi> q+
17:33:38 <bigbluehat> ... all the draft work still in progress seems like it may need to be complete before we do method standardization
17:33:46 <bigbluehat> manu_: so the DID WG was just rechartered
17:33:51 <bigbluehat> ... we have 2 years on that charter
17:33:52 <wschi> present+ Wolfgang Schildbach
17:34:15 <bigbluehat> ... but we need to go into feature freeze next january...so that's not a lot of time...maybe Q2 for a stable spec
17:34:27 <bigbluehat> ... in the meantime, we need to incubate many of these methods
17:34:33 <bigbluehat> ... which I expect to take at least that long
17:34:41 <bigbluehat> ... so, the timelines seem to be aligning
17:35:01 <bigbluehat> ... there is also work in interop exploration
17:35:06 <bigbluehat> ... so we're not starting from scratch
17:35:30 <bigbluehat> ... we're fairly far along from a standardization timeline
17:35:46 <rigo> present+ rigo
17:35:57 <bigbluehat> bumblefudge: so, one of the deliverables is the resolution spec?
17:35:59 <bigbluehat> manu_: yes
17:36:13 <bigbluehat> decentralgabe: yes. the FPWD for the resolution spec should be up in a couple weeks
17:36:24 <bigbluehat> ... and it would be super helpful to have methods to test with
17:36:26 <manu_> q?
17:36:30 <manu_> ack janina
17:36:40 <bigbluehat> manu_: for those of you who don't know decentralgabe is one of our wonderful co-chairs
17:37:03 <bigbluehat> janina: my heads been spinning since I heard CA DMV was using this technology
17:37:13 <bigbluehat> ... there's so much opportunity for A11Y here
17:37:27 <manu_> ack rigo
17:37:27 <Zakim> rigo, you wanted to talk about digital product passports, gaia-x and IDSA
17:37:31 <bigbluehat> ... we could capture so many needs in VC documents
17:37:38 <bigbluehat> manu_: agreed. great opportunities here
17:37:51 <bigbluehat> rigo: I think we cannot wait on someone else to do this work
17:38:08 <bigbluehat> ... I was promoting the `did:web` at a meeting in the EU
17:38:16 <bigbluehat> ... and someone pointed out the flaws of DNS
17:38:29 <manu_> q+ to ask what combinations make sense? Fully decentralized has to be done?
17:38:37 <bigbluehat> ... and the risk of fraud that domains are so easily susceptible to
17:38:49 <bigbluehat> ... if we don't standardize and describe these well, someone else will
17:39:02 <bigbluehat> ... it definitely should be more than one method
17:39:07 <wschi> q-
17:39:22 <bigbluehat> ... things like long term archiving I probably need a blockchain
17:39:36 <manu_> ack manu_
17:39:36 <Zakim> manu_, you wanted to ask what combinations make sense? Fully decentralized has to be done?
17:39:37 <bigbluehat> ... but if I have short lived stuff, we may need something simpler and faster
17:40:13 <bigbluehat> manu_: to that point, if this new method WG were created, we may consider focusing on a web one and an ephemeral one...but what about a decentralized one?
17:40:26 <bigbluehat> ... that is rather the point of DIDs.
17:40:35 <bigbluehat> ... there's work going into `did:dht` for example
17:41:03 <bigbluehat> ... so given the choice between one that does or does not have a decentralized, do people have thoughts on that?
17:41:27 <bigbluehat> rigo: just because the charter has it in there as a possibility doesn't mean they'll deliver on it
17:41:45 <bigbluehat> ... and the WG would give a space for these to be explored
17:42:03 <bigbluehat> ... and the group can deal with the "blockchains are great, please use mine."
17:42:23 <bigbluehat> manu_: so...if we put a blochchain DID method in scope, how do we think the membership will respond?
17:42:30 <bumblefudge> q+
17:42:36 <bumblefudge> to speak to decentralized methods
17:42:45 <bigbluehat> ... last time blockchain came up in an AC meeting...it did not go well [room laughs]
17:43:01 <JakeJones> q+
17:43:07 <bigbluehat> ... the `did:dht` method isn't bitcoin or blockchain, so maybe it has a better chance
17:43:09 <gkellogg> q+
17:43:12 <rigo> s/last time blockchain/last time bitcoin/
17:43:26 <bigbluehat> ... or something like that may avoid these risks
17:43:50 <bigbluehat> bumblefudge: I don't like the framing of one HTTP, one ephemeral, and one decentralized method
17:44:01 <bigbluehat> ... I don't think there's product land agreement on decentralization
17:44:16 <bigbluehat> ... words like archival, temporary, heavy cryptographic
17:44:20 <bigbluehat> ... those may be better
17:44:39 <bigbluehat> ... it avoids the wiggly words that get away from us
17:44:51 <bigbluehat> ... and words like "truly" don't help the conversation
17:44:57 <bigbluehat> ... so maybe more technical terminology
17:45:32 <bigbluehat> rigo: yes. finding these words would be helpful for legal methods
17:45:54 <bigbluehat> ... then you don't need the word decentralized...because often those end up being centralized anyway
17:45:55 <manu_> q+ to ask about government engagement.
17:46:01 <bigbluehat> ... so this functional language seems much better
17:46:03 <bigbluehat> manu_: agreed
17:46:06 <manu_> ack bumblefudge
17:46:06 <bigbluehat> ack bumblefudge
17:46:09 <manu_> ack JakeJones
17:46:09 <Danpape3> Danpape3 has joined #did-methods
17:46:23 <decentralgabe> q+
17:46:33 <bigbluehat> JakeJones: building off what bumblefudge just said, decentralized is just a buzzword...and is meaningless
17:46:40 <manu_> ack gkellogg
17:46:45 <bigbluehat> ... I'd just avoid the word and not try to define it
17:46:51 <bigbluehat> gkellogg: I'd support being generic
17:47:16 <bigbluehat> ... my concerns around blockchain relate to literally boiling the ocean energetically
17:47:33 <bigbluehat> ... we should layout that energy impact of these methods should be a real concern
17:47:39 <rigo> security, energy impact
17:47:42 <bigbluehat> manu_: so adding that as a concern?
17:47:49 <bigbluehat> gkellogg: yes. I think that was in the way in the past
17:48:09 <bigbluehat> ack manu_
17:48:09 <Zakim> manu_, you wanted to ask about government engagement.
17:48:32 <bigbluehat> manu_: some of these government groups are now participating in the W3C
17:48:50 <bigbluehat> ... there are initiatives in the EU around EU individual identities
17:49:15 <bigbluehat> ... but to date we have not really tried to get the EU Commission in to talk about their needs
17:49:15 <bumblefudge> q?
17:49:27 <bigbluehat> ... or other groups about their use of DIDs and VCs
17:49:37 <bigbluehat> ... our CGs provide input into what the EU is doing
17:49:44 <bigbluehat> ... but it ended up being pretty minimal
17:50:00 <bigbluehat> ... as no one was confident it should be the part of the group to do that
17:50:01 <bigbluehat> ... so...should that go into the charter?
17:50:14 <JakeJones> Just as a response to the energy cost of blockchains is something that was actually solved in the initial design of Bitcoin. If you grow the block size to accommodate more transactions per block, the energy cost actually decreases as usage increases with respect to Proof-of-Work blockchains
17:50:21 <bigbluehat> ... US and CA are engaging...but not the EU really
17:50:25 <bigbluehat> rigo: because it can't
17:50:31 <bigbluehat> ... there is no group
17:50:42 <bigbluehat> ... not that can do the liaison
17:50:53 <bigbluehat> ... this current topic is a "new approach" legislation
17:51:07 <bigbluehat> ... they write requirements, must be standardized, and then implemented
17:51:14 <gkellogg> Energy considerations may be needed to address pre-conceptions, if not actuality.
17:51:18 <bigbluehat> ... it must get to normalization
17:51:28 <bigbluehat> ... we've done this in the past around accessiblity
17:51:38 <bigbluehat> manu_: so the most we could do is a liaison relationship?
17:51:40 <bigbluehat> q+
17:52:08 <wes-smith> wes-smith has joined #did-methods
17:52:11 <bigbluehat> decentralgabe: I wanted to +1 bumblefudge around the need for clearer definitions which may relate do Traits
17:52:12 <manu_> ack decentralgabe
17:52:18 <wes-smith> scribe+
17:52:54 <wes-smith> bigbluehat: an interest group for observers has served well for aggregating business/gvt concerns into notes that WGs can use, we have precedent for that in other spaces, good place to hear out the use cases
17:52:55 <wes-smith> scribe-
17:52:55 <kaz> q+
17:53:00 <bumblefudge> comment on europe's priorities for EUDI-ARF -- i think that project is a rough/approximate match to the goals of DIDs-- it might be an input to the specifically "non-repudiable" or "legal-grade controller document" use case, but not to DIDs in general
17:53:00 <manu_> ack bigbluehat
17:53:02 <manu_> ack kaz
17:53:07 <Danpape> Danpape has joined #did-methods
17:53:16 <bigbluehat> kaz: I'm doing a session later today
17:53:28 <bigbluehat> ... and group conversations also include government interests
17:53:44 <bigbluehat> ... this group should also think about global government concerns, not just EU
17:54:05 <bigbluehat> manu_: this is the wrong question...but what countries? [lots of laughs]
17:54:14 <bigbluehat> rigo: we have a process for that
17:54:32 <kaz> q+
17:54:39 <bigbluehat> ... the cool thing is that we're moving from single DID method focus to functional need conversations
17:54:51 <bigbluehat> ... and as we continue that, it will have magnetic power
17:55:02 <bigbluehat> ... people will then work to connect and liaison
17:55:12 <bigbluehat> ... and we should bring in folks we already know are in this area
17:55:23 <bigbluehat> ... and we could even ask the AB
17:55:27 <manu_> q?
17:55:28 <bigbluehat> ... but it's a process over time
17:55:50 <bigbluehat> kaz: at this moment, I'd suggest that we start with several key countries and organizations
17:55:55 <manu_> q?
17:55:57 <bigbluehat> ... and note that it is not an exhaustive list
17:56:00 <manu_> ack kaz
17:56:05 <bigbluehat> manu_: we have 5 minutes left
17:56:08 <bigbluehat> ... any other thouhts?
17:56:16 <bigbluehat> s/thouhts/thoughts
17:56:31 <bigbluehat> manu_: it seems like there is support for doing method standardization at the W3C
17:56:50 <bigbluehat> ... if we standardize them here, we should focus on traits, features, and functionalities
17:57:13 <bigbluehat> ... and we should also make sure that we have a handful of existing methods--not starting from scratch
17:57:28 <bigbluehat> ... I also heard we should lean headily on W3C liaison work
17:57:42 <bigbluehat> ... and potentially using an Interest Group could be of interest for that
17:57:45 <bigbluehat> ... anything else?
17:57:50 <bumblefudge> on the energy-intensitivity question, i don't think we can be completely mute on the subject (some stakeholders might object), but i also think we can't draw a line in the sand-- relative terms like "compute intensivity" or "compute per DID" are more useful than general/architectural biases like "anything that uses a consensus mechanism will burn
17:57:50 <bumblefudge> too much carboN"
17:57:58 <bigbluehat> Mike Jones: do you intend to list candidate DID methods?
17:58:08 <bumblefudge> we can get sidetracked in energy measurability debates as easily as we get sidetracked in decentralization definitions
17:58:14 <bigbluehat> manu_: I don't know...it feels risky for those methods
17:58:28 <bigbluehat> Mike Jones: then the first thing the group has to decide is which methods
17:58:34 <phila> present+
17:58:37 <bigbluehat> manu_: yes. definitely
17:59:00 <bigbluehat> ... look for a charter announcement in the coming months
17:59:15 <manu_> rrsagent, draft minutes
17:59:17 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/09/25-did-methods-minutes.html manu_
18:01:12 <Geun-Hyung3> Geun-Hyung3 has left #did-methods
18:07:50 <rigo> rigo has joined #did-methods
18:08:12 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #did-methods
18:09:41 <gkellogg> gkellogg has left #did-methods
18:13:19 <kaz> kaz has joined #did-methods
18:20:45 <rigo> rrsagent, please draft minutes
18:20:47 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/09/25-did-methods-minutes.html rigo
18:21:14 <manu_> manu_ has joined #did-methods
18:49:12 <manu_> manu_ has joined #did-methods
20:13:44 <rigo> rigo has joined #did-methods
20:18:31 <kaz> kaz has joined #did-methods
20:18:38 <rigo> rigo has left #did-methods
20:58:40 <manu_> manu_ has joined #did-methods
21:46:37 <kaz> kaz has joined #did-methods
22:51:25 <manu_> manu_ has joined #did-methods
23:00:56 <kaz> kaz has joined #did-methods