DID WG Telco — Minutes

Date: 2021-07-27

See also the Agenda and the IRC Log

Attendees

Present: Brent Zundel, Markus Sabadello, Shigeya Suzuki, Manu Sporny, Ted Thibodeau Jr., Orie Steele, Kaliya Young, Adrian Gropper

Regrets:

Guests:

Chair: Brent Zundel

Scribe(s): Manu Sporny, Orie Steele

Content:

Brent Zundel: Let’s begin by reviewing agenda, topics for today – solicit content for press release, give notice for Proposed Rec publication date, spend bulk of meeting on DID Spec registries, then talk about other notes and their progress and how we can move them forward
… any questions on agenda or that they’d like to add/change about agenda?

Manu Sporny: No changes.

1. Content for a Press Release

Brent Zundel: W3C would like us to do a press release around DID spec and it’s official upcoming ratification… they’d like to know about massive deployments, other standards groups using DIDs, any companies that use this stuff and like it… that is information we’re looking for.

Brent Zundel: https://www.w3.org/2021/06/pressrelease-webaudio.html.en

Brent Zundel: https://www.w3.org/2021/01/pressrelease-webrtc-rec.html.en

Brent Zundel: if folks are curious, there are a couple of useful press releases above ^^.
… If anyone has any statement they want to make, please reach out to the Chairs so we can forward comments on to the right people. Any questions?

2. PR publication date

Brent Zundel: This is just a notification to the group, when we proposed to transition to Recommendation, we included a date of July 30th and due to practical impossibilities, that date isn’t going to happen. The new date we’re shooting for is August 3rd 2021, the resolution stands, we don’t need to redo the proposal. Just informing folks that the content is in a new place.

Manu Sporny: I put content in both places so no matter where anyone looks, it’ll be there.

Brent Zundel: We have received no objections to the proposal to go to Proposed Rec… no objections, no opposition to document, we are moving forward to Proposed Recommendation. We are done with our part, we’re passing it on to the W3C Process.

3. DID Spec Registries

Brent Zundel: This is going to form the bulk of our conversation today – the last time we spoke, there were a couple of resolutions that haven’t been acted upon, I believe those have been addressed at this point… there are a number of issues in registries that are open, let’s go through them.
… we can also go in another direction if folks want.

Brent Zundel: https://github.com/w3c/did-spec-registries/issues

Brent Zundel: There is the link to registry issues ^^ just going to start at the top
… We’ll do a best effort processing…

Orie Steele: When is drop dead date for press quotes?

Brent Zundel: We have a good month or a bit more… but sooner the better. DIF is working on a press quote.

Ted Thibodeau Jr.: Can we do better order of action?

Brent Zundel: no problem, let’s do that.
… Let’s start w/ 16…

3.1. Add precommit hook + linter (issue did-spec-registries#16)

See github issue did-spec-registries#16.

Brent Zundel: Orie, what needs to happen here?

Orie Steele: I think this comes from an era where we were managing a lot of JSON-LD changes… people were submitting JSON-LD contexts, one small break breaks it for everyone…. CI pipeline had added checks to prevent that from happening… we’ve changed the way DID Core handles JSON-LD contexts.

Ted Thibodeau Jr.: +1 close, overtaken by events

Orie Steele: We removed all term definitions not in DID Core… you’re using a separate context file for extra suites/terms… protection for DID Spec Registries is lighter… linting HTML file… recommend closing this issue. We’re no longer taking PRs into structured data objects.

Manu Sporny: +1 to close

3.2. Add strict URI pattern (issue did-spec-registries#7)

See github issue did-spec-registries#7.

Orie Steele: I don’t think we need this anymore, not relying on JSON Schema in any way.
… This is one of the benefits and drawbacks of using schemas – what if we make the registry really powerful wrt. data model… we’ve moved away from that, moved away from schema languages, will leave a comment to that effect.

Manu Sporny: +1 to close

Markus Sabadello: I think when we removed CDDL, there could be other things for DID Core, that might be stable, but extensions are hard to maintain… just saying that we are not completely moving away from validating data model, but as far as extensions, I think we can close it.

3.3. Define unified versioning system for machine and human readable definitions. (issue did-spec-registries#17)

See github issue did-spec-registries#17.

Orie Steele: We did this, but the DID core test suite, if you look at context examples, there is community consensus on how to version contexts wrt. DID Documents including DID Core context…. and then there are community ones, date stamped, versioned… I think we should close this issue and point to examples in DID Core test suite.

Manu Sporny: +1 to close

3.4. Storing normative properties? (issue did-spec-registries#9)

See github issue did-spec-registries#9.

Orie Steele: I believe we resolved this as well, we re-structured the way the registry defines terms in DID Core, the way the registry lists properties of the abstract data model, properties of representaions, properties of extensions are all defined in DID Spec registries… I think this is done, however, we did spend a lot of time talking about this particular issue. I wonder if folks are happy w/ the way things ended up.
… Either issue should be closed because we made necessary adjustments, or concrete proposal to say how it should change to do something different (and accomplish same task)

Manu Sporny: +1 to close and say new issue for new suggestions

Manu Sporny: Closed issue 9.

3.5. OCAP properties need to be defined or removed (issue did-spec-registries#41)

See github issue did-spec-registries#41.

Brent Zundel: As of #47, all OCAP properties have been removed or are defined

Manu Sporny: +1 to close

Manu Sporny: Issue 41 closed.

3.6. DID Core Registries Stabilization Checklist (issue did-spec-registries#13)

See github issue did-spec-registries#13.

Manu Sporny: the only 2 things that have not been checked, have been moved out of did core.
… the redirects have also been addressed
… there was a proposal…

Orie Steele: We may have to look at the ns page vs. the registry… we should put those links at the bottom of this issue and close it and then get more approval/review on how we ended up solving this at the top level… maybe folks don’t agree with ns system? I don’t think folks agree with what happened here.

Orie Steele: https://www.w3.org/ns/did

Orie Steele: https://www.w3.org/TR/did-core/

Orie Steele: https://www.w3.org/TR/did-spec-registries/

Manu Sporny: We need to open a new issue to get a review on https://www.w3.org/ns/did
… Please open it on did-spec-registries.

Orie Steele: i’ll open it, please assign reviewers.

Brent Zundel: Any opposition to close this issue as long as we track the review in a separate issue?

Manu Sporny: Issue 13 is closed.

Manu Sporny: (No objections to closing)

Orie Steele: Opened as https://github.com/w3c/did-spec-registries/issues/322

3.7. Add column for link to implementations for each DID Method (issue did-spec-registries#77)

See github issue did-spec-registries#77.

Manu Sporny: i’m happy to close this, although it would be nice to understand usage of properties.

Orie Steele: We should add navigation to DID Test Suite

Manu Sporny: We can do that using useful links in respec.

Brent Zundel: Let’s add an issue

Manu Sporny: CLosing issue 77.

Manu Sporny: Orie is adding the issue.

3.8. Add transform-keys=jwks parameter for use with OIDC SIOP (issue did-spec-registries#66)

See github issue did-spec-registries#66.

Markus Sabadello: Quick correction, assigned to Oliver… this is an extension, DID URL parameter, has been added to registries… probably we can close this since it’s been added.

Manu Sporny: Closed issue 66.

3.9. Microsoft has approved did:github or it has been removed from the registry (issue did-spec-registries#94)

See github issue did-spec-registries#94.

Orie Steele: I feel like I should withdraw did:github, we have did:web now… I kinda don’t want to remove it, but I don’t want to get us in trouble.

Brent Zundel: We have created the registry to register extensions, to date I’m not aware of any opposition from Microsoft on did:github, I think that opposition would need to appear before we act to remove the DID Method unless the author of the DID Method wishes to pre-emptively do so.

3.10. Define Trademarked and Branded DID Method Registry Policy (issue did-spec-registries#93)

See github issue did-spec-registries#93.

Orie Steele: We did make some improvements to this, added PR that improved warning at front about this.
… Under registration process… use must be authorized for copyrighted stuff, addition cannot create unreasonable moral, privacy, copyright, trademark issues.
… I suggest we should close this issue as process has been updated.

Manu Sporny: +1 to close

Brent Zundel: any opposition to closing issue?

Manu Sporny: No opposition.

Manu Sporny: Issue 93 closed.

3.11. Add a column for third party security audit to DID Method Registry? (issue did-spec-registries#91)

See github issue did-spec-registries#91.

Orie Steele: To date, no one has volunteered to audit 103+ DID Methods in registry… would be a sparse field… don’t have much detail… most of registered methods have barely met registration methods, privacy/security sections existing or more than a section or two existing… This should be closed. I don’t think folks are going to want to do this.

Manu Sporny: +1 to closing.

Markus Sabadello: One thing that could be done… add a column for “Evaluation of DID Rubrics”… scope of Rubric has expanded, covers security aspects… links to evaluations of DID Rubric, but Orie is right… will anyone do that?

Brent Zundel: My $0.02, this sounds like a great thing for interested folks to add to a maintenance group, but DID Spec Registries will probably be fine w/o column for 3rd party Rubric audits.
… My recommendation is that we close it, is anyone opposed? Alternatively, we could label it as defer.

Manu Sporny: No objections.

Manu Sporny: Closing 91.

3.12. These registries needs and Expert Review Required section. (issue did-spec-registries#81)

See github issue did-spec-registries#81.

Orie Steele: We should close this due to lack of feedback.

Manu Sporny: Didn’t we do some variation of this? We do have a registration procedure that people should follow, right? And we oversee that?

Brent Zundel: Hearing no opposition to closing this, we do have a registration procedure, close?

Manu Sporny: No objections.

Manu Sporny: Closing issue 81.

3.13. Add note about deprecating publicKey in favor of verificationMethod (issue did-spec-registries#54)

See github issue did-spec-registries#54.

Orie Steele: I believe we did this.

Orie Steele: https://w3c.github.io/did-spec-registries/#publickey

Brent Zundel: Close 54?

Manu Sporny: No objections.

Manu Sporny: Issue 54 closed.

Brent Zundel: Brief question – keep going, or talk about other notes?

Orie Steele: I’m not sure if we can have that conversation w/ this small group… would prefer a larger group setting… let’s keep going on issues, make them go away.

Brent Zundel: I’m fine with that objection, anyone else have an opinion?

Manu Sporny: Keep going…

3.14. Move meta data to meta data section (issue did-spec-registries#53)

See github issue did-spec-registries#53.

Markus Sabadello: This is done, I believe.

Brent Zundel: Closing…

Manu Sporny: Issue 53 closed.

3.15. Update proof based on did core spec changes (issue did-spec-registries#52)

See github issue did-spec-registries#52.

Orie Steele: At one point, at the beginning, DID Core discussed proofs, I think we’ve successfully removed the discussion from everything… I think we did this.

Orie Steele: See https://github.com/w3c/did-spec-registries/blob/main/vocabs/v1/context.jsonld

Orie Steele: no proof

Brent Zundel: Any opposition to closing?
… Seems this has been done.

Manu Sporny: Closed issue 52.

3.16. Why are we using didv in our core context? (issue did-spec-registries#48)

See github issue did-spec-registries#48.

Manu Sporny: I believe this is done… yes, it’s done

Orie Steele: This is done, see https://github.com/w3c/did-spec-registries/blob/main/vocabs/v1/context.jsonld

Brent Zundel: opposition to close?

Manu Sporny: No opposition.

Manu Sporny: Issue 48 is closed.

3.17. Unresolved issues from CCG did-method-registry repo (issue did-spec-registries#105)

See github issue did-spec-registries#105.

Orie Steele: We addressed most of this…

Brent Zundel: I’m going to leave 105 open for now…
… We can come back to it in the future… still work to be done there.
… We’re going to close the meeting today… thanks to Ted for suggesting direction, we close a lot of issues today!
… What we went through today makes it clear that we still have work to do on registries before I’ll be satisfied w/ them, look forward to more of this and more registries work.

Ted Thibodeau Jr.: closed 15, opened 2. good ratio