14:41:23 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #vcwg
14:41:27 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2026/05/13-vcwg-irc
14:41:27 <Zakim> RRSAgent, make logs Public
14:41:28 <Zakim> please title this meeting ("meeting: ..."), ivan
14:41:36 <ivan> Meeting: Verifiable Credentials Working Group Telco
14:41:36 <ivan> Agenda: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-vc-wg/2026May/0024.html
14:41:36 <ivan> chair: brentz
14:41:36 <ivan> ivan has changed the topic to: Meeting Agenda 2026-05-13: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-vc-wg/2026May/0024.html
14:57:24 <brent3> brent3 has joined #vcwg
14:57:31 <brent3> brent3 has left #vcwg
14:57:45 <brent> brent has joined #vcwg
14:59:45 <phila> phila has joined #vcwg
15:00:00 <phila> present+
15:00:03 <wes-smith> wes-smith has joined #vcwg
15:00:58 <wes-smith> present+
15:01:03 <hsano> hsano has joined #vcwg
15:01:04 <ivan> present+
15:01:10 <hxavier> hxavier has joined #vcwg
15:01:17 <ivan> present+ hxavier
15:01:46 <hsano> present+
15:02:19 <ivan> present+ msporny
15:02:43 <ivan> present+ brent
15:02:55 <ivan> present+ bigbluehat
15:03:02 <ivan> present+ kevin
15:03:22 <ivan> present+ joeandrieu
15:03:35 <brent> present+
15:03:49 <kezike> kezike has joined #vcwg
15:03:59 <kezike> present+
15:04:07 <ivan> present+ dlongley
15:04:18 <bigbluehat> scribe+
15:04:29 <KevinDean> KevinDean has joined #vcwg
15:04:56 <ivan> present+ Phil-ASU
15:05:05 <bigbluehat> phila: I'm watching IRC and not Zoom, so please post in IRC if you need anything
15:05:17 <ivan> present+ kezike
15:05:24 <TallTed> present+
15:05:32 <bigbluehat> .... Hiroyuki, could you please introduce yourself?
15:05:38 <pdl-asu> pdl-asu has joined #vcwg
15:05:46 <pdl-asu> present+
15:05:49 <bigbluehat> Hiroyuki: I met many of you at past events
15:05:49 <ivan> present+ wip
15:05:52 <TallTed> q+
15:05:58 <phila> ack TallTed
15:05:58 <bigbluehat> phila: right. Hiroyuki is from Sony
15:06:14 <bigbluehat> TallTed: I'm Ted and have been attending many of these calls for many years
15:06:30 <ivan> present+ olvis
15:06:34 <bigbluehat> ... I will be absent next week, but should be in the week after
15:06:45 <bigbluehat> phila: thank you, Ted. Anyone else want to do an introduction?
15:06:49 <manu> q+ to mention something quickly.
15:07:02 <bigbluehat> ... k. let's move on to discuss the face-to-face
15:07:04 <phila> ack manu
15:07:04 <Zakim> manu, you wanted to mention something quickly.
15:07:15 <phila> -> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Emo_yVt90Z5xnHNBPhShO4B7zYQ7kwMfNcOa6sKAdoc/edit?gid=179611341#gid=179611341
15:07:21 <bigbluehat> ... I think everyone who's coming has already filled in the attendance form
15:07:38 <bigbluehat> ... but if you haven't and plan to come in person, we need to know now
15:07:45 <bigbluehat> ... so if fill that in if you're coming
15:08:03 <bigbluehat> manu: for the face to face, I think we've got several threat modeling things we want to do
15:08:15 <manu> Render Method threat model: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1mQg0pdPMfytkAIgsaApODbaKO--PJvr_E4ZM2HoQPzk/edit?tab=t.0#heading=h.py96npebo7ox
15:08:32 <manu> Recognized Entities: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1EDKHeg03lXcjCq2_evNI18bUjtmhMU66HvyrCa5gQa0/edit?tab=t.0#heading=h.py96npebo7ox
15:08:32 <JoeAndrieu> JoeAndrieu has joined #vcwg
15:08:34 <bigbluehat> ... and in prep for that, I've created a few documents that cover some brainstroming we've been doing in other groups
15:08:41 <manu> VC Data Model: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lKDPZwezBbTrBM8_OalrKVO4JwPdwZl3nB6eLfJ_-4A/edit?tab=t.0#heading=h.py96npebo7ox
15:08:51 <manu> VC Barcodes: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1EWC5EQB-rfDho8lxm5fBhDGAoprTwqLw_o34qKVe6QU/edit?tab=t.0
15:09:07 <Wip> Wip has joined #vcwg
15:09:11 <Wip> present+
15:09:13 <JoeAndrieu> q+ to mention possibly having Simone facilitate an exercise
15:09:16 <bigbluehat> ... the usefulness of using a Google Doc for this is that anyone can contribute and then editors can clean it up
15:09:18 <phila> ack JoeAndrieu
15:09:18 <Zakim> JoeAndrieu, you wanted to mention possibly having Simone facilitate an exercise
15:09:32 <bigbluehat> ... we also have a VCALM one that might show up soon
15:09:42 <bigbluehat> JoeAndrieu: I'll try and find that one too
15:10:00 <bigbluehat> ... I wanted to mention that Simone may be available to help facilitate for us at the face to face
15:10:12 <bigbluehat> ... not sure of the logistics, but he's at least the right timezone
15:10:19 <manu> q+
15:10:24 <phila> -> Agenda https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1h-0OXOR5NsY-OlC0i26mCDK45B15j2BfkL8f2CIY30E/edit?gid=0#gid=0
15:10:25 <bigbluehat> ... so, chairs, perhaps we can add that to the agenda
15:10:29 <bigbluehat> phila: that does sound good
15:10:41 <bigbluehat> ... we've got coffee breaks scheduled so far at least!
15:10:59 <bigbluehat> ... and we've started accommodating remote participants for some discussions
15:11:00 <JoeAndrieu> VCALM draft threat model https://docs.google.com/document/d/11DvzPJhiMuXLLyifA6ANLhT4aOXne_C1rEv4Bedy26M/edit?tab=t.0
15:11:03 <phila> ack manu
15:11:14 <bigbluehat> ... so if we can find a time that works for Simone, then we should try and schedule that
15:11:27 <bigbluehat> manu: JoeAndrieu do we have a VC Data Model threat model yet?
15:11:34 <bigbluehat> JoeAndrieu: my hope was to work backwards to that
15:11:53 <bigbluehat> ... our different task forces seem to have very different attack surfaces
15:12:12 <bigbluehat> ... but yes, the VCDM threat model is still on the horizon
15:12:28 <ivan> present+ jennie
15:12:39 <bigbluehat> phila: most of the EU is taking the day off tomorrow, so scheduling Simone may be tricky
15:12:50 <bigbluehat> ... brent ivan can one of you get Simone scheduled?
15:12:57 <bigbluehat> ivan: do we have a preference for the day?
15:13:07 <bigbluehat> phila: there's a link to the draft agenda in chat
15:13:21 <bigbluehat> ... so looking at that, it's ideally Tuesday afternoon
15:13:28 <bigbluehat> ... maybe after lunch?
15:13:39 <bigbluehat> ivan: k. I'll start there and see what simone needs
15:13:52 <phila> -> Social event, Wednesday https://www.belgianbeerworld.be/en
15:13:54 <bigbluehat> phila: agreed. we can work to accommodate simone's schedule
15:14:15 <bigbluehat> ... there's a social event, please sign up!
15:14:23 <bigbluehat> ... the face to face is 3 weeks away
15:15:18 <bigbluehat> ... Jenny, can you  scribe?
15:15:26 <bigbluehat> Jenny: not this week, I'm on the phone
15:15:36 <bigbluehat> phila: thank you, sounds good. bigbluehat please continue
15:16:09 <ivan> topic: https://github.com/w3c/vc-wg/pull/13
15:16:28 <bigbluehat> phila: ivan, please set the stage
15:16:41 <bigbluehat> ivan: I promised I'd do an overview, so here goes
15:16:46 <ivan> https://github.com/w3c/vc-wg/pull/13/changes
15:17:05 <bigbluehat> ... this PR includes a table of all the vocabularies in progress
15:17:19 <bigbluehat> ... their context files, formal URLs for the vocabs, etc.
15:17:27 <bigbluehat> ... where they're stored, etc.
15:17:38 <bigbluehat> ... hopefully, I did not forget anything
15:17:53 <bigbluehat> ... manu and dlongley have reviewed so far
15:18:09 <bigbluehat> ... the question we have to answer is whether we continue this structure
15:18:20 <bigbluehat> ... using version numbers, etc.
15:18:45 <bigbluehat> ... and we might need to bump version numbers for context files, vocabs, etc.
15:19:07 <bigbluehat> ... we haven't historically done this specifically this way, so we need to define this more strictly this time
15:19:30 <bigbluehat> ... and we need to decide where we put new terms--existing vocabs? or new ones?
15:19:45 <bigbluehat> ... not all of this needs to be decided today, but we should set down some governance
15:19:49 <manu> q+ to note review (LGTM) and future vocab/context work (the governing principles)
15:20:01 <phila> ack manu
15:20:01 <Zakim> manu, you wanted to note review (LGTM) and future vocab/context work (the governing principles)
15:20:04 <dlongley> scribe+
15:20:23 <dlongley> manu: +1 to the PR
15:20:40 <dlongley> manu: Suggested changes I made you merged in, Ivan, thank you. The rest looked good to me, it aligns with what we've been doing for many years now, +1 to that.
15:20:57 <dlongley> manu: With respect to what are the governing principles for the future with vocabs and context files, a couple of thoughts.
15:21:04 <phila> q+
15:21:32 <dlongley> manu: Ivan has created a really useful tool called yml2vocab and it can take a vocab file and auto-generate well-formed JSON-LD context files. He has refined this over the years and we don't even need to handcraft those now we just generate them. We should use that by default for any work in this group.
15:22:01 <dlongley> manu: I think there are some challenges where there are -- like a subset where we want to define something in a base vocab and only use a subset in a context file and, Ivan, that might be another feature we might need.
15:22:02 <dlongley> scribe-
15:22:18 <bigbluehat> manu: Ideally want to lock in all the URLs for the extension specifications
15:22:28 <bigbluehat> ... so we need to decide for VC Barcodes
15:22:44 <bigbluehat> ... I'd suggest we put all the extension terms into the VC Data Model vocab
15:22:58 <bigbluehat> ... and for the JSON-LD context files, we need to do 2 things
15:23:18 <bigbluehat> ... a tiny JSON-LD context so those can be mixed into other things like VC1.1 implementations
15:23:35 <bigbluehat> ... as well as getting those terms into a VCv2.1 context containing all the new extension terms
15:23:47 <phila> ack me
15:23:48 <bigbluehat> ... and make sure all the vocab URLs are in `w3.org` space
15:23:55 <bigbluehat> phila: thank you
15:24:13 <bigbluehat> ... as someone who was not deeply involved by how this came about, this looks like a "dog's dinner"
15:24:32 <bigbluehat> ... I know there's a lot of things in-flight with implementations happening alongside specification writing
15:24:42 <bigbluehat> ... but now we have multiple namespaces
15:24:49 <manu> q+ to note we build a decentralized system, and people are using it :)
15:24:53 <ivan> q+
15:25:00 <bigbluehat> ... some in `w3id.org`, some in `w3.org`
15:25:26 <bigbluehat> ... the terms specified in the VCDM as part of the recommendation, then part of the process should be to show that those terms have been used
15:25:48 <bigbluehat> ... and in an ideal world (which is not the one we're in), we'd go back in time and fix all the URIs properly
15:26:01 <bigbluehat> ... and we could add all those terms as a sidecar to the main vocab
15:26:18 <bigbluehat> ... but, absent that, it would be good to help developers to explain all the vocab terms
15:26:28 <bigbluehat> ... how they came into being, etc.
15:26:32 <manu> q+ to note each spec does that (point to the proper locations).
15:26:39 <manu> q+ to +1 entry point.
15:26:39 <bigbluehat> ... if that's not absurd, then we need some sort of entry point to this
15:26:47 <phila> ack next
15:26:48 <Zakim> manu, you wanted to note we build a decentralized system, and people are using it :) and to note each spec does that (point to the proper locations). and to +1 entry point.
15:26:53 <bigbluehat> ... I'd love for them to be outside the main vocab, because it all feels like a mess to me
15:27:02 <bigbluehat> manu: it may feel like a mess
15:27:11 <bigbluehat> ... because you now see the gory details
15:27:18 <bigbluehat> ... folks outside just use the VCDM context
15:27:29 <bigbluehat> ... so they just copy/paste a URL and they're done
15:27:41 <bigbluehat> ... so maybe you're reacting to the "sausage making"?
15:27:50 <bigbluehat> ... and not what most developers will need
15:28:04 <bigbluehat> ... ivan's done a great job of tracking all that down already
15:28:16 <bigbluehat> ... it'd be great to have a front door, like you descibe
15:28:30 <bigbluehat> ... and start with "just use the VCDM context" to get started
15:28:44 <bigbluehat> ... and then maybe mention how to augment that if/when needed
15:28:59 <bigbluehat> ... we very consciously built this as a decentralized system
15:29:13 <bigbluehat> ... and to some extent this is exactly how this should play out
15:29:40 <dlongley> yay for decentralized innovation! -- coming together again afterwards is important too to help people understand, +1 for "entry points"
15:29:50 <bigbluehat> ... we've talked about doing a "clean up"/renaming before, and that usually just runs into what implementations are already doing
15:29:57 <phila> ack ivan
15:30:00 <bigbluehat> ... so, I think from the outside, I think it looks OK
15:30:09 <bigbluehat> ... but I agree it is hard/ugly from inside the group
15:30:15 <bigbluehat> ivan: I do agree with you phila
15:30:26 <manu> q+
15:30:38 <bigbluehat> ... I don't really buy the "it's decentralized" argument, because it's all built by mostly the same group
15:30:47 <bigbluehat> ... but however it happened, what's done is done
15:31:01 <bigbluehat> ... happily, though, most of this is starting to take a consistent shape
15:31:12 <bigbluehat> ... so, if we can continue that, we are at least sort of OK
15:31:28 <bigbluehat> ... for the "entry point" document, I'd still need to know more about what it would contain
15:31:38 <bigbluehat> ... it should probably get folded into the overview documenpt
15:32:02 <bigbluehat> ... having it as a separate document feels too abstract for most people to care about
15:32:06 <manu> q+ to note that there seems to be an argument for centralization here -- academic purity (we have all worked on this -- isn't right, there have been varying opinions in the group -- for example, data integrity) -- which the Web doesn't do -- "it would have been nice for all commerce sites to be put under the .com domain name"
15:32:07 <bigbluehat> s/documenpt/document
15:32:17 <bigbluehat> ... but we can discuss that
15:32:17 <manu> q+ olvis
15:32:18 <manu> q-later
15:32:22 <manu> q- later
15:32:35 <bigbluehat> phila: I think that's a great idea to add it to the overview doc
15:32:48 <bigbluehat> ... point people to the VCDM context and call it good
15:32:51 <manu> q+ to note we have those sections already (here's the hash, etc.)
15:33:18 <phila> ack olvis
15:33:21 <bigbluehat> ... just a reminder, if you are naturally quiet person, please feel free to type
15:33:26 <bigbluehat> ... we want to hear from you
15:33:41 <bigbluehat> olvis: I appreciate the chance to talk
15:34:03 <bigbluehat> ... I want to say a consistent vocabulary adds a lot of value
15:34:29 <bigbluehat> ... for an architecture perspective, a lot of work has been done for the years--which is great and amazing
15:34:39 <bigbluehat> ... but we also have to consider the current reality
15:34:48 <bigbluehat> ... and think this through from a user perspective
15:34:58 <bigbluehat> ... and we should think through some alternative ways related to AI
15:35:27 <bigbluehat> ... because when we develop documentation and standards, considering AI seems very relevant
15:35:42 <bigbluehat> ... especially it we include CLIs and things for agents to use
15:36:06 <phila> ack manu
15:36:06 <Zakim> manu, you wanted to note that there seems to be an argument for centralization here -- academic purity (we have all worked on this -- isn't right, there have been varying opinions
15:36:07 <bigbluehat> ... having these vocabs and terms will have a lot of value
15:36:10 <Zakim> ... in the group -- for example, data integrity) -- which the Web doesn't do -- "it would have been nice for all commerce sites to be put under the .com domain name" and to note we
15:36:10 <Zakim> ... have those sections already (here's the hash, etc.)
15:36:23 <bigbluehat> manu: I think we're getting into some academic purity
15:36:44 <bigbluehat> ... so, I don't think we're going to reach some level of academic purity
15:36:51 <brent> q+
15:37:00 <bigbluehat> ... we approached the W3C about a redirect service, and they said no
15:37:04 <dlongley> +1 to manu ... decentralization was required here to make progress
15:37:12 <bigbluehat> ... which is why we now have `w3id.org`
15:37:17 <bigbluehat> ... which is fine
15:37:22 <bigbluehat> ... but now we have what we have
15:37:49 <bigbluehat> ... there's no consistency of use across domain names
15:38:05 <bigbluehat> ... even when TLDs were originally intended to classify businesses with `.com`,  etc.
15:38:21 <bigbluehat> ... we really shouldn't fear the URLs that get used in these contexts and vocabs
15:38:33 <ivan> present+ elaine
15:38:35 <bigbluehat> ... because controlling them isn't really achievable
15:38:52 <bigbluehat> ... we can try, but we continue to make decisions that cause problems
15:38:59 <dlongley> try for cohesion and consistency where you can get it, but accept it's ok when you don't always get it (because the trade offs are better than gatekeeping)
15:39:03 <bigbluehat> ... like putting the VCDM in front of Data Integrity
15:39:05 <pdl-asu> An index page, that Phil A and Manu have mentioned previously is still a good idea. But that's encough.
15:39:12 <bigbluehat> ... that was a political choice...and a bad one
15:39:18 <bigbluehat> ... Data Integrity can be used on it's own
15:39:31 <bigbluehat> ... but now it has this awkward VCDM namespace in front of it
15:39:31 <phila> ack brent
15:39:33 <bigbluehat> ... which confuses people
15:39:45 <bigbluehat> ... and that confusion is not technical, but political
15:40:14 <bigbluehat>  brent: w3id.org got brought up as a possibility for the W3C to take on
15:40:18 <bigbluehat> manu: yes!
15:40:24 <phila> Topic: https://github.com/w3c/vc-data-integrity/issues
15:40:50 <bigbluehat> phila: manu you have issues in the Data Integrity spec
15:41:06 <bigbluehat> manu: just to make folks aware of what that Task Force is doing
15:41:15 <manu> subtopic: https://github.com/w3c/vc-data-integrity/issues/344
15:41:28 <bigbluehat> ... Greg is involved in this one
15:41:50 <bigbluehat> ... Greg has taken on the unenviable task of refactoring all the algorithms across all the specs to look for commonalities
15:41:58 <bigbluehat> ... and then move those into the core Data Integrity spec
15:42:12 <bigbluehat> ... such as selective disclosure ones
15:42:27 <bigbluehat> ... many of these are in cryptosuite sub-specs
15:42:41 <bigbluehat> ... and in issue 344 Greg's working on mapping that out
15:43:00 <bigbluehat> ... and now that we have FPWDs, he's going to move a bunch of stuff around that is purely editorial
15:43:16 <bigbluehat> ... that is in prep for the post-quantum work coming into the group
15:43:24 <bigbluehat> ... anyone have concerns with any of that?
15:43:40 <bigbluehat> phila: my understanding of what you say, is that it should be a good deal easier to follow what's going on
15:43:46 <dlongley> and reusability of all the algorithms across specs
15:43:55 <bigbluehat> ... and an improvement in readability and consistently
15:44:21 <bigbluehat> manu: yes, we have others making new cryptosuites, and this should let them reference existing stuff vs. copy/pasting or recreating it
15:44:33 <bigbluehat> ... Greg would love help if anyone is interested/able
15:44:46 <dlongley> +1 to this being an excellent editorial upgrade
15:44:53 <bigbluehat> ... I will note there are a number of "future" issues
15:44:58 <bigbluehat> ... and I think we're in the future now
15:45:09 <bigbluehat> ... should we process those today? or put them on a future call?
15:45:21 <bigbluehat> phila: if there are one or two you want to look at, we can now
15:45:23 <manu> subtopic: https://github.com/w3c/vc-data-integrity/issues/340
15:45:29 <bigbluehat> manu: yes, issue 340
15:45:44 <bigbluehat> ... this is about cryptographic primitives used on existing mobile phones
15:46:04 <bigbluehat> ... there is a question around how much we should speak to existing tech
15:46:37 <bigbluehat> ... there are not secure enclaves on phones today--and I haven't heard of any coming in the next year--that handle post-quantum cryptography
15:46:45 <bigbluehat> ... so, Apple, for example only support ECDSA
15:47:12 <bigbluehat> ... we could warn people that current mobile phones when a quantum computer shows up
15:47:39 <bigbluehat> ... and these existing folks will not be able to safely do a presentation with any of the existing cryptography available on those phones when that happens
15:47:43 <brent> q+
15:47:51 <ivan> q+
15:47:51 <phila> ack brent
15:47:52 <bigbluehat> ... we'd have to quickly shift things to newer cryptography
15:48:00 <phila> q+
15:48:08 <bigbluehat> brent: large tech companies rarely share explicit timelines
15:48:21 <bigbluehat> ... however, Google said they're planning a fell post-quantum rollout by 2029
15:48:38 <bigbluehat> ... and they do explicitly mention Android being prepared for that
15:48:50 <bigbluehat> ... so future phones should be more PQ capable than current ones
15:48:56 <bigbluehat> ... and perhaps those show up sooner than later
15:49:02 <manu> q+ to note "not future" but "present day"
15:49:15 <phila> ack ivan
15:49:20 <bigbluehat> ... for example, I work for a hardware company and we've got an alpha device that is post-quantum ready
15:49:21 <manu> q+ to note more about people not upgrading, and not "it will be available"
15:49:43 <bigbluehat> ivan: how does this effect our specifications, because that is what we're really responsible for
15:49:48 <phila> ack phila
15:50:07 <bigbluehat> phila: I think that's  related to my question. I translate what's being said to wonder how much it matters
15:50:23 <phila> ack manu
15:50:23 <Zakim> manu, you wanted to note "not future" but "present day" and to note more about people not upgrading, and not "it will be available"
15:50:29 <bigbluehat> ... are we talking about exclusively smart phones? there are certainly other things out there
15:50:49 <bigbluehat> manu: +1 to what brent said, there is new stuff coming
15:51:04 <bigbluehat> ... however, what about the people who don't upgrade
15:51:21 <bigbluehat> ... it's far less of a concern for large companies using cloud-based HSMs
15:51:28 <bigbluehat> ... but consumers will suffer
15:51:47 <bigbluehat> ... if they get into self-sovereign wallets on their current phones
15:52:05 <bigbluehat> ... and don't upgrade--for financial reasons or any other reason--they'll be at risk
15:52:21 <KevinDean> q+
15:52:30 <bigbluehat> ... so, should our specifications state that wallets should be prepared to do software-based post-quantum
15:52:56 <phila> ack KevinDean
15:53:17 <bigbluehat> KevinDean: I don't think we do this in a spec
15:53:25 <bigbluehat> ... this is a very broad problem
15:53:42 <bigbluehat> ... we can mention it, but really this would be in a threat model doc
15:53:50 <bigbluehat> phila: is that the answer you needed manu ?
15:53:54 <phila> Topic: Overview
15:53:58 <phila> -> https://www.w3.org/TR/vc-overview/
15:54:00 <bigbluehat> manu: yeah, sound like "write threat model text"
15:54:18 <bigbluehat> phila: ivan wrote an Overview document awhile back
15:54:25 <bigbluehat> ... and I'm keen to get more folks involved
15:54:34 <bigbluehat> ... this doc is our primer / start-here / etc.
15:54:52 <bigbluehat> ... and I wonder if people in this group who are not the "usual suspects" who talk a lot
15:55:01 <ivan> q+
15:55:03 <bigbluehat> ... could look to contribute to this Overview document
15:55:14 <bigbluehat> ... and to see if you might write some new text for this document
15:55:16 <phila> ack bigbluehat
15:55:29 <phila> ack ivan
15:55:34 <bigbluehat> ... it would help everyone
15:55:56 <bigbluehat> ivan: I'm very supportive of what you said
15:56:01 <bigbluehat> ... but it might be a bit early
15:56:22 <bigbluehat> ... we could get a unified architecture of the whole thing into this document...eventually
15:56:38 <bigbluehat> ... but right now there are a high number of satellite documents
15:56:43 <bigbluehat> ... and those need to settle down
15:56:53 <bigbluehat> ... so, 3-4 months from now, that would be great
15:56:57 <bigbluehat> phila: so, TPAC?
15:57:02 <bigbluehat> ivan: yeah, that would be better
15:57:17 <bigbluehat> phila: following our face-to-face will be in October in Dublin
15:57:27 <bigbluehat> ... 2027 will be in December in Panama
15:57:38 <bigbluehat> ... thank you everyone!
15:57:39 <ivan> rrsagent, draft minutes
15:57:41 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2026/05/13-vcwg-minutes.html ivan