14:49:57 RRSAgent has joined #did 14:50:01 logging to https://www.w3.org/2026/07/23-did-irc 14:50:12 rrsagent, make logs public 14:50:18 Meeting: Decentralized Identifier Working Group 14:50:21 Chair: ottomorac 14:50:27 Agenda: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-did-wg/2026Jul/0023.html 14:50:27 clear agenda 14:50:27 agenda+ Agenda Review, Introductions (5 min) 14:50:27 agenda+ CR Transition Request Preparation (20 min) 14:50:27 agenda+ DID Resolution Test Suite (15 min) 14:50:27 agenda+ DID URL De-referencing Discussion \[2\] (10 min) 14:50:30 agenda+ Next Time (5 min) 14:50:36 previous meeting: https://www.w3.org/2026/07/22-did-minutes.html 14:50:48 next meeting: https://www.w3.org/2026/07/29-did-minutes.html 14:51:49 transcriber-bot has joined #did 15:01:22 Wip5 has joined #did 15:01:24 present+ 15:01:53 present+ 15:02:10 JoeAndrieu has joined #did 15:02:47 present+ 15:04:44 transcriber-bot, connect 15:04:46 scribe+ 15:04:54 Topic: Agenda Review, Introductions 15:04:57 Otto Mora: We got a lot… a lot to go through today, so… Let me... 15:05:11 ... Uh, yeah, so today we, um, we're just gonna discuss about the, uh, transition request and the prep for that. Uh, then we have a, a topic, uh, related to that, which is the, the resolution test suite 15:05:19 ... And then if time permits, we may discuss a bit about the GDURL dereferencing 15:05:28 ... So we'll see if we get there. Is there any other topic beyond that that folks want to bring up before we start? 15:05:31 q+ 15:05:32 Joe Andrieu: Did we mention the test suite? Is that in order?... 15:05:34 ... Okay 15:05:36 ack manu 15:05:40 Otto Mora: That's in the, yeah, that's the second item after the transition. Yes, bottom?... 15:06:00 q+ 15:06:06 Manu Sporny: Yeah, sorry if we've already discussed this, or there's a plan here. I noticed that when I registered for TPAC, the VCWG and the DID working group conflicted with each other for every meeting. I mean, that's a pretty big problem. Are we… moving the DID working group meeting to earlier in the week, or what's going on there?... 15:06:09 Otto Mora: So… I know that we had requested specifically to avoid the conflict, um... 15:06:13 Manu Sporny: We are specifically overlapped with VCWG. Yep... 15:06:16 Otto Mora: And where is overlapping right now? Yeah, maybe Will can chime in here. Go ahead, Will... 15:06:19 ack Wip5 15:06:34 ack Wip 15:06:36 Will Abramson: Yeah, I did mean to reach out to people about that when you said that. I mean, it's quite frustrating, because I think they were the only group that we said, please don't buzz with them. So, uh, yeah, I don't know what's happened there. I guess I need to reach out to… Alexandra, or someone? Yeah, I will take that on... 15:06:52 Topic: CR Transition Request Preparation 15:07:01 subtopic: https://github.com/w3c/did-resolution/pull/350 15:07:01 Otto Mora: All right. Yep, thanks for that, uh, for flagging that, Mano. Anybody else have any other… Okay, so... 15:07:09 ... Let's, uh, let's start here. Um, I think first, the first item, perhaps the most pertinent one, would be the, the pull request that, uh, Joe kindly prepared for us. So it's there, it's 350 15:07:14 ... I do see a few reviews trickling in 15:07:20 ... I don't know if there's any particular 15:07:23 ... Uh, things you want to highlight, Joe, before we open it up to the group, or any other 15:07:37 Joe Andrieu: Just the two things I mentioned in chat. One is we need to pick the date so we can have a correct published date here... 15:07:57 q+ 15:07:59 ... That is one of the respec config parameters that Manu correctly pointed out. We want not the date we pulled the snapshot, but the date that our publication is. And I think the proposal was, like, 30 days from today or something? But I don't think we locked in a particular date 15:08:02 Otto Mora: That's fair... 15:08:06 ... Fumbling for a pen 15:08:10 ack manu 15:08:12 ... Uh… Yeah, Manuel, go ahead 15:08:19 q+ 15:08:25 Manu Sporny: Um, usually you put it, like, 2 weeks, um, in advance, uh, so that gives the, uh, management 2 Fridays to... 15:08:29 q- 15:08:40 ... uh, determine if they're gonna publish it, and then you have to pick the publish date on either Tuesday or Thursday. Um, so looking at the calendar… What is this? July 23rd. Um… no 15:08:42 JennieM has joined #did 15:08:43 Joe Andrieu: Sorry to interrupt, Manny. I thought we'd heard 28 days minimum from PA... 15:08:55 ... Oh, I see. Different, got it 15:08:55 present+ 15:08:55 ... Great 15:09:03 Manu Sporny: No, no, that's the CR… that's how long the period lasts. There are two dates that we care about. One of them is the publication date, and the other one is how long we want to keep CR open for. We want to keep CR open for the minimum amount of time possible, which is 30 days. Um, but, uh, the publication date, if we picked... 15:09:12 danpape has joined #did 15:09:17 ... 23rd, 30th. If we picked August 4th. I think we should be okay. That gives two Fridays. Uh, of course, defer to Pierre Antoine. Uh, I don't think we have any publishing moratoria coming up, do we? 15:09:21 q? 15:09:21 Otto Mora: Okay... 15:09:31 Pierre-Antoine Champin: Sorry, lost my mute button. No, there's no publication moratorium coming up... 15:09:40 ... And yes, two weeks is the usual reasonable delay between transition requests and actual publication 15:09:45 q+ to ask about crEnd 15:09:49 ... Uh, maybe we can… maybe we can make it slightly longer in this summertime, but, uh, I mean, yeah 15:09:55 Manu Sporny: It's not a big deal if we pick the wrong date because we can always update the... 15:09:59 ... date, right? So, my suggestion is we pick August 4th, um 15:10:01 Pierre-Antoine Champin: No, indeed. Indeed... 15:10:04 Manu Sporny: And if we have to shift it, we shift it... 15:10:14 Joe Andrieu: All right, I am applying that right now. And then I had a question about, you mentioned the end date... 15:10:20 ... Um 15:10:30 ... I we I did not specify CR end in the respec config I saw that that was a parameter. But it seemed… you suggested we want that to be the minimum? What happens when that ends? 15:10:30 q+ 15:10:39 Otto Mora: Uh, yeah, go ahead, Ben... 15:10:41 ack JoeAndrieu 15:10:41 JoeAndrieu, you wanted to ask about crEnd 15:10:43 Joe Andrieu: What if we haven't satisfied what we need to for exiting CR? Bye then... 15:10:44 ack manu 15:10:51 Manu Sporny: then we just take longer. So, it's just us announcing to the world, like, this is the soonest we could come out of CR. If we haven't met our requirements by then, we just take longer... 15:10:54 Joe Andrieu: Cool, thanks... 15:10:58 ... So, I did just apply, uh, an 8-4 15:11:02 ... Um, well, I guess I didn't hit the commit button yet, but 15:11:06 ... And then the other question was, um 15:11:12 ... Is the shift I made to invited experts, correct? Is that the right way to do it for Steven? 15:11:19 ... I just put, instead of his company being listed there, uh, the words invited expert in parentheses 15:11:34 Manu Sporny: That's a question for PA. PA, my understanding is that W3C policy was that if someone is an invited expert, they're listed as such, and we don't list their company name there, because that's a... 15:11:39 ... benefit that only W3C members get. I don't know if I've… that has been updated or changed 15:11:48 Pierre-Antoine Champin: No, I think that's correct. I can, I can double check, but that's, that seems to be the safest option. Yes... 15:11:52 Joe Andrieu: Okay, and just plain text in parentheses is a good way to indicate it... 15:11:56 pdl-asu has joined #did 15:12:00 Manu Sporny: There is… that… yeah, that's fine. There's a respec… you can do things in respec to... 15:12:08 present+ 15:12:08 ... do that automatically. There are other specs that do that that I can't think of off the top of my head 15:12:14 ... Just check like data integrity or VC data model, but that should be fine 15:12:15 q? 15:12:29 Joe Andrieu: Okay. I will apply that now. And, when we go back and update index dot HTML, I'll figure out the respec friendly way to do that because this is just a snapshot. Right?... 15:12:37 ... So… And I think that's then all the comments and requested changes 15:12:39 ... Thank you for that feedback. Well, Amanda, it was appreciated 15:12:45 Otto Mora: Yep. Perfect... 15:12:52 ... Yep, and I did see the revision history. Sorry, I hadn't, obviously. Credited in detail, but yeah, it's there, so 15:12:54 Joe Andrieu: It's all good. It's new. Like, we put we it was put into the CR. Not not this round, but the previous one... 15:12:57 Otto Mora: Got it... 15:13:03 Joe Andrieu: So it is new. I don't think most of the group have read through it. And it was largely AI created, so... 15:13:05 Otto Mora: Okay... 15:13:08 Joe Andrieu: I don't know who among us, um... 15:13:08 q+ 15:13:12 ... Has the expertise offhand to write that list 15:13:28 ... But I scan I did scan through it So this is an invitation actually to read through that a little more rigorously. I did read through it. Seemed… like, the reasonable set and at a good granularity. Um… But folks might want to double check 15:13:31 Otto Mora: Yep... 15:13:32 ack manu 15:13:36 ... Uh, and yeah, go ahead, Manu, sorry 15:13:45 Manu Sporny: Yeah, I did read through it in detail and I agree with Joe. It seemed like a good feature set and a good granularity and hooray for AI for making that easier on the editors... 15:13:48 Joe Andrieu: Cool... 15:13:58 q? 15:14:01 Otto Mora: Okay. That's great. Yep. Yep. That's section here. So okay. Excellent. Yeah. But but we could get that done... 15:14:15 ... Okay. Anything? Yeah. Don't see anybody else. But yeah. So the idea being, I guess, we would merge this PR, like, potentially end of day today. Is that. Got the plan 15:14:24 Manu Sporny: We could do it on the call now, if we're ready, I mean... 15:14:27 Otto Mora: Yes. Agree... 15:14:30 Manu Sporny: It's all editorial stuff... 15:14:33 Otto Mora: Okay... 15:14:43 Joe Andrieu: Okay. Yeah. Plus one of that, like, so this merge is not itself the request to go into CR. This is getting our repo so that we can make the request... 15:14:46 Otto Mora: Right... 15:14:50 Joe Andrieu: So we can merge this right now, and then we can frame the proposal to go in the CR, and I think all that's consistent with my understanding of. process... 15:15:01 Otto Mora: Yes, that's exactly — well, yeah, that's part of what I was thinking about as well. Yeah. Okay, so... 15:15:07 ... Uh, yeah, any last comments from anybody else? Otherwise, this gets burst in. Pretty much, no 15:15:11 ... Okay 15:15:14 ... Uh 15:15:21 ... Okay, for me to do it? Yep 15:15:27 Joe Andrieu: Yes, please... 15:15:30 Otto Mora: Okay, there we go... 15:15:37 ... Um, alright, cool. So… With that, we get to the next topic, so… Second 15:15:42 subtopic: Resolution to request CR 15:15:47 ... Actually, there's none. Good. Request. We are 15:15:56 ... So yeah, so I have the draft resolution here proposal published that the resolution v. 1 spec 15:16:14 swcurran has joined #did 15:16:14 ... as a 1st candidate recommendation, and the short name being debt resolution 1 0 like so. And yeah, we we said, prefer publication date as soon as possible. Cr period of 21 days. And then, in the last bit, I just said, to implement 15:16:19 present+ 15:16:20 q+ 15:16:22 JennieM has joined #did 15:16:24 q+ to confirm the CRD in the file name is irrelevant 15:16:26 ... Two independent implementations of each mandatory normative feature are required to submit it to the AC for publication. This last bit, uh, uh, submit to AC is, uh, something that Pierre pointed out 15:16:28 ack manu 15:16:30 ... as well. But yeah, that's what I had in mind. Mano? 15:16:33 Manu Sporny: The... 15:16:54 ... the URL might be incorrect. Uh, we are publishing a candidate recommendation snapshot, not a candidate recommendation draft, and the date is wrong on it, because we're publishing August 15:17:06 ... 4th0804, you can probably just hack the URL, remove the D from CRD. Joe, I think that's the correct thing to do, but please… Correct me if I'm wrong 15:17:14 ... Index.html 15:17:15 ... Mmhm 15:17:21 Joe Andrieu: So, I actually queued up to talk about that exact same thing. I think it would be better to go to CR. We'll need to change the file name. I mean, because this should be the actual URL, right, that staff can go to, so… Um, let me… uh... 15:17:37 Manu Sporny: Typically, what I do, Joe, is just use index.html there, and just delete the last of, um… last… yeah, delete that entire thing. Just delete, uh… yeah, you can put index.html there... 15:17:48 q? 15:17:53 ack JoeAndrieu 15:17:53 JoeAndrieu, you wanted to confirm the CRD in the file name is irrelevant 15:17:54 ... deferring to Joe on the final call on that, but that just makes it so that we don't have to get the date right and all that kind of stuff, and we can still… you might still need to update in place based on what the publication team comes back with. Like, if the date changes, or 15:18:01 ... They find some syntax issues or. Things like that 15:18:02 Joe Andrieu: Okay, um, I will move that file right now... 15:18:05 Otto Mora: Mm-hmm... 15:18:11 Joe Andrieu: Um, but that shouldn't hold up the proposal. Um… But I'll get a quick PR just to make that name change... 15:18:14 Otto Mora: Okay, this... 15:18:22 ... And CR1 is fine, because it's the first, right? That's the folder. Okay. Okay, cool, so 15:18:25 Manu Sporny: Correct. Yep. First snapshot... 15:18:30 transcriber-bot, pause 15:18:30 scribe- 15:18:38 proposal: Publish the DID Resolution v1.0 specification as a First Candidate Recommendation (https://w3c.github.io/did-resolution/transitions/2026/CR1/index.html) with a new short name of did-resolution-1.0, a preferred publication date as soon as possible, and a CR period of 28 days. Two independent implementations of each mandatory normative feature are required to submit it to the AC for publication. 15:18:39 +1 15:18:42 +1 15:18:44 +1 15:18:45 +1 15:18:56 +1 15:19:02 +1 15:19:10 +1 15:19:13 +1 15:19:23 smccown has joined #did 15:19:27 +1 15:19:31 present+ 15:19:36 tallted +1 15:19:46 resolved: Publish the DID Resolution v1.0 specification as a First Candidate Recommendation (https://w3c.github.io/did-resolution/transitions/2026/CR1/index.html) with a new short name of did-resolution-1.0, a preferred publication date as soon as possible, and a CR period of 28 days. Two independent implementations of each mandatory normative feature are required to submit it to the AC for publication. 15:19:54 transcriber-bot, resume 15:19:54 scribe+ 15:20:01 Joe Andrieu: Bye... 15:20:21 https://hackmd.io/@4eXUYCFUR5-YwotSiwmb3Q/SJ4Ij8REzl 15:20:22 Otto Mora: Um… To, yeah, to go ahead and, uh, and do that. So, great. Okay. So, um… Let me just resume. So on on the other topic. Which I believe was, uh... 15:20:29 ... the transition request note, and I I got started with this, Manu. I don't want to take us through the whole thing, but I just wanted to inform you that we we did have a hackmd file here that I'm collaborating on with Pierre and the others. Uh, it… let's check the link here as well, if it's a public link. The, um 15:20:36 ... Yeah, we're working on a few of these links, obviously, like, uh, the frozen version and all that stuff. And then, uh 15:20:53 ... updating these things also as well as we go. The the group decision will be here after the meeting today. The the way that I also worded it is that this is the 1st recommendation. Cr, for the 15:21:08 ... The date resolution spec after the date resolution 0.3 was published in late 2024. So if you have any observations on that wording, let me know. I'll link the revision history here from the PR that Joe just pushed 15:21:28 ... the wide review is just linking the wide review horizontal review issue that you created. I don't know if we wanna like go through the specific all these like tag and ping and sing, or do we just link to the main 15:21:32 ... tracker issue that you have from your side, which is this one. It still needs a couple of them to be closed in. Um 15:21:47 ... And then, other than that, I list some liaisons, including the Vcwg. That did did methods working group. At least, I'm definitely regularly participating in that one 15:22:05 ... the Iso Tc. 307 joint working group, which specifically for me is about decentralized identity on blockchains. Ccg. Ietf, and I know that you also wanted the Cfrg. From I from Ietf, but I'm happy to add any others that you consider. Uh, relevant 15:22:24 ... formal objections. I said, No, I will actually not sure what to mention in this part of the implementation. I would defer to to your recommendation there. But yeah, so it's taking shape. This this would be essentially what Pierre would submit for. um 15:22:30 q? 15:22:34 q+ 15:22:34 ... For transition requests. So it's a working document. Pierre also has edit access to it as well. But I just wanted to review that for you guys. Any comments? 15:22:38 ack manu 15:22:54 ... Yes, hello 15:23:03 Manu Sporny: Just that it looks good. In implementation, we can just say there's a test suite here that will list the results. Um… And, you know, we already have confirmation that they're going to be at least… well, we already have multiple implementations... 15:23:03 Otto Mora: Uh-huh... 15:23:06 Manu Sporny: And… yeah, that's it... 15:23:09 Otto Mora: Okay, perfect... 15:23:13 ... Uh, alright. Great 15:23:18 q? 15:23:20 ... And if anybody has any other comments as well, the public link is there that I just shared in the chat 15:23:25 ... Um, let us know, then. I guess that the plan being… to 15:23:31 ... file this transition request, would it be, like, uh, tomorrow? Or 15:23:36 q+ 15:23:38 ... Like today is itself as well. What would be the. I guess the idea here would be my question 15:23:41 ack manu 15:23:41 q- 15:23:42 Pierre-Antoine Champin: Yeah, the sooner the better I can... 15:23:45 Otto Mora: Uh, good... 15:23:52 Pierre-Antoine Champin: I can take care of this late my time if that's necessary. Today, I mean... 15:24:05 Otto Mora: Okay, so… okay, so yeah, so… tonight, uh, potentially. Uh, yeah. That seems to be what one was, like, in agreement with, so yeah, we would do that today. Okay... 15:24:15 ... So, I think that's it for transition requests, unless, uh, there was any other topic related to 15:24:22 ... to this part. Oh, yeah. And then the the short name, as you see, date resolution. One. Oh, let's be discussed here 15:24:26 q? 15:24:30 ... Great. Okay, great. So that's a transition request 15:24:33 ... And then we can then move on to the next topic 15:24:39 Topic: DID Resolution Test Suite 15:24:39 ... Which would be bit resolution test with some topic 15:24:51 ... Okay, so on this one 15:25:00 ... I think the first thing was the renaming of the repo. Right? Which… if… I understood right from our chat 15:25:05 ... Pierre, you had, uh, access to it, and you just renamed, right? 15:25:09 Pierre-Antoine Champin: Yeah, renamed it and moved it to the W3C organization... 15:25:22 https://github.com/w3c/did-resolution-test-suite 15:25:26 Otto Mora: OK, so let me just make sure that we have the link for that. I'm going to try to pull it from the chat. something like that. All of our conversations… Yes. Okay, so it is here... 15:25:34 ... date resolution, test suite. So, it's this… this, uh, repo now. So that's where it's, uh 15:25:38 ... like, live now. So 15:25:41 ... What else is pending, I guess? Uh 15:25:47 ... In terms of updating this, so that we're ready for 15:25:52 ... For CR, is there any other… uh… I think that we need to be 15:25:56 q? 15:25:58 ... Uh, discussing here for this one, maybe Will knows more about it 15:26:06 Will Abramson: Yeah, sorry. I can speak briefly about this... 15:26:07 Otto Mora: Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm... 15:26:10 Will Abramson: uh... 15:26:24 ... I think it's ready, right? Like, I mean, PA did the work to move it across. Um, it has, you know, it now is off the back URL. I mean, it's even at the TR space 15:26:33 ... Sorry, no, it's not on the TLS-based URL. I guess we should update the URL that's linked on the About page. I'll do that just now 15:26:38 ... um… But apart from that, you know, this test suite is not complete, obviously 15:26:46 ... But I think it is com… there is tests for the majority of the features in this, um 15:26:58 ... in the… in the CR release that we're trying to make, right? Um, and 15:27:08 ... Uh, we have some implementations, like Manu said, and hopefully we'll be getting more. Like, I think there are a number of implementations that are still to be integrated into this test suite and, like, made into… they get into that report, so hopefully 15:27:11 ... like, if you go to the URL currently, it says there are a few features that are not, um 15:27:18 ... were, like, not supported or, like, at risk, I expect that it's gonna, um, decrease 15:27:30 ... I think once we get all the implementations out there integrated, I hope we have full coverage. So, it's great. And then, obviously, the other thing to talk about is 15:27:39 ... I mean, we don't need to talk about it, but just note, because obviously getting out of CR, we want to, you know, check that box that we talked about yesterday around having implementations with 15:27:51 ... So they support two different DID methods, and ideally two different implementations that support both the same DID methods. And I think we have a path to do that, so I'm not worried about it 15:28:04 ... Yeah, I think a single chip. I haven't had time, uh, yet to properly dive in and just review against the current spec, um, to see what is tweaking, but especially considering we did not make the change from DID to DID URL 15:28:08 q? 15:28:11 ... I'm not expecting that to be, um, significant changes required, so… Thanks. It's in my way 15:28:23 q? 15:28:29 Otto Mora: Thank you so much, Will. I know this has been one that you've been pushing on your own. Thanks for all the great work there. Anybody has any comments on this?... 15:28:40 ... If not, we can move on to the… The next topic… Okay. Great, um 15:28:44 ... So, yeah, so our last topic, um 15:28:45 Topic: DID URL De-referencing Discussion 15:28:49 ... Would be, uh, the URL dereferencing 15:28:54 ... Um, on this one, I know that, uh 15:29:01 ... At least yesterday, we discussed the diagram. That would be part of the 15:29:03 subtopic: https://github.com/w3c/did-resolution/pull/344 15:29:05 ... of that. Uh, so let me just off-topic the PR itself 15:29:11 ... So this is the pull request that's there, and that has a diagram 15:29:23 ... that I believe during the the call yesterday we we gave some feedback to Joe and then in this I guess we've shared. But 15:29:26 ... uh 15:29:43 ... This diagram we reviewed yesterday. We did a few changes to it. And I know that Joe has the latest working version of this 15:29:50 q? 15:29:52 ... I don't know if we try to do that kind of similar path to what we did yesterday. Joe kind of walked us through the updated diagram. Is that a good use of our time, or… Maybe you want to. I'm sticking to some other aspect of it 15:30:03 Joe Andrieu: It's a good question. Um... 15:30:10 ... I guess the one thing I wanted to add is we did have a suggestion from Steven that's not in here, which is on the last row 15:30:28 ... Um, just to add a saliency check to the metadata to make sure that the particular property applies to this particular URL. Um, we… we do that in all the other flows, but I left it out of that one. So that's on my to-do to add. Um, and then I'll be writing up a proposed version of this. Um… Uh, for folks to review next week 15:30:29 q? 15:30:33 Otto Mora: Makes sense. That's good... 15:30:44 ... Okay, I see nobody on the queue. Um, Will, do you… I mean, I'm tempted to just, uh 15:30:53 ... finish here, but I don't know if you think that's pertinent, or if there's something else we should be addressing regarding this before… We close the call 15:30:58 ... And, uh, just try to maybe focus the rest of the time on getting the transition request on 15:31:01 Will Abramson: Um... 15:31:27 ... Yeah, I mean, that sounds fine to me. I guess the call to folks, you know, me and you can focus on the transition request, Otto, and call to folks maybe to just review… I mean, I think we're all aligned with this diagram, right? Like, we went over it yesterday 15:31:38 ... I think it's just a review to everyone to try and review the… the text associated with this diagram to see if it maps your understanding, uh, and raises any comments, so we can get this in as well, because I think that's, you know, great progress. to addressing something that we've been battling with in this group for many months now 15:31:42 ... So yeah, I'm also happy to close. I guess one last thing that I'll just flag briefly is, I mean, you know, I did raise a 15:31:54 ... comment on our scheduling issue, and it looks like we're going to be able to resolve that. It was just a little confusion with the way we filled out the… Uh, form. Hopefully that's going to be resolved too 15:31:56 q? 15:31:59 Otto Mora: Thank you... 15:32:06 ... Thanks for that. Appreciate it 15:32:15 ... Um, yeah, so if there's nothing else, I will, um… I will stop the bot, and maybe then, uh, maybe… I don't know if Joe and Will want to stay on with Pierre, and we can just try to, uh, put a bow on this, and 15:32:16 ... Call it a day, hopefully 15:32:19 transcriber-bot, pause 15:32:19 Joe Andrieu: Yeah, that sounds good... 15:32:19 scribe- 15:33:16 TallTed has joined #did 15:33:26 q+ 15:33:33 ack JoeAndrieu 15:36:37 https://www.visual-paradigm.com/download/community.jsp 15:37:19 zakim, end the meeting 15:37:19 As of this point the attendees have been Wip, ottomorac, pchampin, JennieM, pdl-asu, swcurran, smccown 15:37:21 RRSAgent, please draft minutes 15:37:22 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2026/07/23-did-minutes.html Zakim 15:37:29 I am happy to have been of service, ottomorac; please remember to excuse RRSAgent. Goodbye 15:37:29 Zakim has left #did 15:37:46 TallTed has joined #did 15:40:53 present+ 15:45:16 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2026/07/23-did-minutes.html TallTed 16:18:51 scribe- 16:23:25 dmitriz has joined #did 16:29:25 dmitriz has joined #did 17:47:49 ottomorac has joined #did