15:07:25 RRSAgent has joined #did 15:07:25 logging to https://www.w3.org/2021/01/19-did-irc 15:07:27 RRSAgent, make logs Public 15:07:28 please title this meeting ("meeting: ..."), ivan 15:07:38 Meeting: DID WG Telco 15:07:38 Chair: burn 15:07:38 Date: 2021-01-19 15:07:38 Agenda: https://www.w3.org/mid/000000000000e6f95b05b8f11747@google.com 15:07:38 ivan has changed the topic to: Meeting Agenda 2021-01-19: https://www.w3.org/mid/000000000000e6f95b05b8f11747@google.com 15:37:27 dmitriz has joined #did 15:50:39 TallTed has joined #did 15:51:44 shigeya has joined #did 15:54:21 TallTed has changed the topic to: Meeting Agenda 2021-01-19: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-did-wg/2021Jan/0019.html 15:56:06 present+ 15:57:48 present+ 16:00:04 justin_r has joined #did 16:00:18 markus_sabadello has joined #did 16:00:30 present+ 16:00:37 present+ 16:00:50 phila has joined #did 16:00:57 present+ 16:01:12 present+ 16:02:14 present+ 16:02:36 agropper has joined #did 16:03:06 chair: brent 16:03:07 present+ 16:03:10 drummond has joined #did 16:03:10 present+ 16:03:16 present+ 16:03:27 present+ markus_sabadello 16:03:27 present+ 16:03:38 present+ jonathan 16:03:39 present+ 16:03:46 jonathan_holt has joined #did 16:03:52 present+ phila 16:03:55 present+ jonathan_holt 16:04:02 present+ 16:04:16 JoeAndrieu has joined #did 16:04:24 present+ 16:04:34 present+ JoeAndrieu 16:04:34 present+ dlongley 16:04:45 agropper_ has joined #did 16:06:45 What time is the special topic call again? 16:07:25 scribe+ 16:07:30 topic: appendix 16:07:51 dmitriz: Hi, from Digital Bazaar, generally a fan of this community. 16:07:56 brent: Remember to rejoin the group 16:08:12 brent: Special topic call is today at 6pm ET today - Tuesday Jan 19th. 16:08:47 drummond: I'm working on getting suggestions in -- long thread - reformatting, no specific suggestions, not sure how to act on them. If anyone has feedback, please narrow it down to be specific to the changes that you'd like to see. 16:09:41 Appendix PR: https://github.com/w3c/did-core/pull/460/ 16:09:41 brent: Reminder that special topic call today is a working session for those that want help writing PRs -- if you need questions answered by the group to make progress, this is your opportunity. 16:09:48 https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues?q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+sort%3Aupdated-asc+-label%3A%22just+before+CR%22+ 16:09:49 Topic: Issue Processing 16:10:26 https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues/292 16:10:38 brent: This is to keep track of all horizontal review -- TAG will do a review today 16:10:50 https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues/291 16:11:00 brent: PING will be updating 16:11:05 s/updating/reviewing soon/ 16:11:12 https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues/425 16:11:15 https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues/425 16:11:20 scribe+ 16:11:24 manu: still need to do it 16:11:36 https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues/530 16:12:38 jonathan_holt: I have a template that I've used for other Linux projects, want to see engagement of the group wrt. direction -- governance model, EIP or Aries to capture thoughts for the "why" -- that may help the WG transition to a maintenance WG. I have a template -- before I work on that, would love to get feedback. 16:12:46 q+ 16:12:47 jonathan_holt: At least one person has said it's a bad idea. 16:13:09 ack ivan 16:13:15 ivan: Only question is -- why is it a pre-cr topic. 16:13:30 manu: every issue we have has been assigned a pre-cr what we need to do before cr 16:13:42 ... every issue is a pre cr topic save for two that have already decided more or less to defer 16:13:49 ... everything gets a priority on what the group feels 16:14:00 ivan: there are a number of things we can sort during cr before the end of the wg 16:14:05 ivan: There are a number of things we can deal w/ during CR 16:14:10 ivan: This is one of those. 16:14:20 brent: I think that's something we can discuss on next Editors/Chairs call. 16:14:36 https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues/523 16:14:57 q+ 16:14:59 manu: I think this was dealt with, I'll check 16:15:06 manu: I think this was deal with but don't remember, I'll check on it. 16:15:17 https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues/199 16:15:24 drummond: Waiting on appendix. 16:15:40 agropper has joined #did 16:15:48 q- 16:15:56 jonathan_holt: I'll just make comments in issue -- integers for epoch time was in scope, didn't know it was in scope -- thought we were using string xml - will make comment in the issue. 16:16:10 https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues/324 16:16:11 re 523 -- I've not drafted a PR (and am not sure *I* can thread that needle, though Manu is confident someone can) 16:16:17 https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues/324 16:16:30 JoeAndrieu: We have no done anything, need to schedule a call w/ Adrian. 16:16:59 https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues/340 16:17:04 brent: This is unassigned. 16:17:08 jonathan_holt: Pending close 16:17:21 https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues/370 16:17:49 agropper: I have no heard from EFF -- this will disappear once Joe and I have the discussion we've just talked about. 16:18:02 q+ 16:18:13 https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues/391 16:18:22 ack markus_sabadello 16:18:43 markus_sabadello: we marked this as potentially deferred - despite several attempts, no one volunteered to be assigned, we may still see PR for this this week - if not, we'll defer it. 16:19:26 https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues/504 16:20:11 drummond: two parts -- feedback on text, that issue, brent you reviweed it - Joe still has objection - not sure what to do with - not change in text, Joe we still need to find out what happens there. Move to different part of spec, note, fine w/ that. 16:20:16 q+ 16:20:18 drummond: Need Editors to decide where it best belongs 16:20:26 ack JoeAndrieu 16:20:43 regrets+ burn 16:20:44 JoeAndrieu: Maybe I'm looking at the wrong thing -- I don't see my issue. 16:20:44 agropper_ has joined #did 16:21:03 drummond: Thought you were reviewing -- PR 457 addresses this issue -- shigeya raised this separately. 16:21:17 drummond: This is a matter of deciding where we want to move that section. 16:21:34 https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues/72 16:21:54 drummond: That one is in progress, working on it, no PR yet - started drafting text... on the list for this week. 16:22:14 https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues/380 16:22:28 this is resolved, it got renamed 16:22:33 brent: pending close - think this has been resolved, if you feel it hasn't jump on and say so 16:22:51 https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues/373 16:22:55 drummond: this is in process 16:23:07 PR 460 - need feedback on that PR 16:23:20 https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues/527 16:23:33 brent: covered by 163, pending close 16:23:56 https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues/468 16:24:11 brent: this is a potential defer, if you don't think it should be deferred, volunteer to take it forward. 16:24:12 q+ 16:24:39 markus_sabadello: There is a PR for this -- maybe we should assign the person that raised the PR -- 16:24:44 brent: Daniel Buchner... PR 453 -- assigning him now 16:25:21 ack markus_sabadello 16:25:22 https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues/399 16:26:18 markus_sabadello: raised by ivan to clarify dereference function was defined in an abstract way - returns final resources - did raise a PR that exists now to add that clarification - whenever we touch on these topics, there are always discussions around what does it mean to resolve / derefrence, what steps happen in which order. 16:26:21 q+ 16:26:25 markus_sabadello: There is an ongoing discussion ont he PR 16:26:26 DID Core #453 is an issue, not a PR -- https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues/453 16:26:36 brent: PR 544 is where discussion is happening. 16:26:43 ack jonathan_holt 16:27:03 jonathan_holt: This also impacts 452 - composite key - I was going to do a PR for that one, let's have some discussion when we get to it. 16:27:17 https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues/452 16:27:26 https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5234#section-2.3 16:27:46 https://github.com/w3c/did-core/pull/543 is the PR for Issue 468 above 16:28:07 jonathan_holt: In the comments, there are normative comments in ABNF rules - not an expert -- if we are going to do a concatenation of strings - in essence what we're trying to do is use a DID URL, composite key fingerprint identifier -- conflicts -- I am conflicted. 16:28:28 jonathan_holt: Excellent reason to come to the call today. 16:28:43 s/jonathan_holt: Excellent reason/brent: Excellent reason/ 16:28:53 https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues/463 16:29:45 markus_sabadello: follow up of last VF2F -- abstract data model, different representations -- what to name different things in DID Document, properties, entries, syntax, representation independent things... things like that, haven't raised PR yet -- diagram and concrete proposal for text change, will change that into a PR or maybe in working session. 16:30:12 https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues/170 16:30:19 brent: Mike has committed to raising a PR for this one. 16:30:31 brent: if anyone else has more information to add there, jump on the queue, otherwise we'll move on. 16:30:45 https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues/495 16:30:59 shigeya: I think the PR is ready now 16:31:16 shigeya: PR 540 was raised, please review 16:31:40 https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues/538 16:31:48 brent: There is a PR that addresses this -- 541 16:32:26 https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues/545 16:33:08 markus_sabadello: In terminology section, DID URL dereferencing has DID Document as one of it's inputs -- so this PR only changes entry in terminology to make that consistent. 16:33:29 markus_sabadello: What it means to resolve/dereference and what are dependencies -- but there is a PR for this, think there is support for fixing this. 16:34:14 https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues/539 16:34:35 JoeAndrieu: We ended up focusing on resource=true, but not sure what boundaries were for herd privacy -- I guess I'll go through and suggest my own areas of suggestions. 16:34:49 https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues/556 16:35:15 brent: Not assigned to anyone -- question is about use of colons and how that relates to colons in other URNs 16:35:25 q+ 16:35:38 s|DID Core #453 is an issue, not a PR -- https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues/453|| 16:35:38 s|https://github.com/w3c/did-core/pull/543 is the PR for Issue 468 above|| 16:35:38 brent: Those who have knowledge and expertise -- related topics were discussed -- ABNF for DID -- please jump on and comment there 16:35:38 s|brent: Daniel Buchner... PR 453 -- assigning him now|brent: Daniel Buchner... PR 543 -- assigning him now| 16:35:47 q+ 16:35:53 ack JoeAndrieu 16:36:06 JoeAndrieu: We did have one resolution -- manu said he'd do it. 16:36:14 manu: Yes, I did volunteer to do that... 16:36:20 ack drummond 16:36:48 drummond: I will address the use of ':' in DIDs -- was a lot of thought put into that 16:37:04 brent: Next issue -- moving to page 2 -- security flaws in DagCBOR -- issue 551. 16:37:07 https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues/551 16:37:10 q+ 16:37:18 manu: I reviewed the DAG CBOR and canonicalization section 16:37:25 ... I believe there are security concerns, jonathan has responded 16:37:30 ... that the security flaws come from the ADM 16:37:32 ... discussion continues 16:37:38 ... there's a PR to put the section at risk 16:37:50 ... I don't know if jonathan is raising a process violation or disagreeing wth the editorial change 16:37:52 ... That progresses 16:38:04 ... We need someone committed to writing tests for DAG CBOR and the canonicalization rules 16:38:10 ... and understand who is doing the two implementations 16:38:16 ack jonathan_holt 16:38:21 ... if we can't get that before CR we may want to mark as at risk because people haven't committed to do the work 16:39:03 jonathan_holt: As I mentioned in the issue -- I appreciate any potential security flaws, limitation of ADM -- recent change that makes list to infra set -- how is that set ordered, really important -- already had discussion about numbers/bigints -- we were not going to explore that in spec -- lastly in spec 16:39:24 jonathan_holt: The potential process violation - you (Manu) as an editor, you're flagging as at risk -- I have a meeting w/ W3C to discuss this more. 16:39:47 brent: The first step is to talk to the DID WG Chairs. 16:40:07 jonathan_holt: Yes, still need to go through AC training... I have concerns. 16:40:20 brent: I will reach out to schedule a time with the Chairs - Dan and me. 16:40:30 brent: I think that we've looped around. 16:40:44 brent: I think we're done w/ issue processing.. 16:40:51 Ivan: nope -- 404, still open. 16:40:58 agropper has joined #did 16:41:42 https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues/386 16:41:52 q+ 16:41:59 ack dlongley 16:42:38 dlongley: Since Daniel nor Orie are here -- discussion is ongoing. 16:42:50 https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues/337 16:43:11 brent: Orie isn't here, moving on 16:43:24 brent: looks like conversation is continuing -- that's a good sign. 16:43:31 https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues/404 16:44:11 ivan: I have created a new PR 554 -- minor change -- discrepancy between examples and table of properties -- my PR adds missing property -- manu has concept, example might be something we don't want -- I don't care, I care about consistency. 16:44:17 q+ 16:44:25 ack manu 16:44:38 manu: the general questiont o the group is is anyone in the group expressing a verification method in a service description today? 16:44:56 ... the example, someone from the hubs community has said we want to use verification methods in a hub endpoint description 16:45:04 ... if nobody is doing it, we can remove it from the spec. Doesn't preclude it from happening 16:45:17 ... so is anyone using a verification method in a service description today and wants an example in the spec to show that? 16:45:35 ivan: if that's the case, manu you can close that PR and one of us can remove the example 16:45:37 manu: +1 16:45:53 ivan: That's the same problem as I have before. 16:46:10 ivan: From a CR point of view, that issue could be closed... however, I added two PRs to registries. 16:46:37 ivan: Added JSON Schema and SHACL and vocabulary -- things that are in my view necessary for a proper definition, finished SHeX today -- PRs for registries as related to 404 issue. 16:47:08 ivan: That is not something that must be done before CR -- but there are things that can be done before CR, what URLs to use, etc... so - I leave it to the Editors how they want to handle it, otherwise issue should be closed. 16:47:10 q+ 16:47:14 ack manu 16:47:28 manu: proposal is to merge it in did spec registries in its current state and close the issue on DID Core 16:47:33 ... we're very close 16:47:42 ivan: but then there are still open issues in the registries 16:47:48 manu: yep 16:48:34 https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues/559 16:48:39 brent: assigning shigeya 16:48:46 shigeya: PR is ready, please review 16:48:58 brent: PR 560, ready to review, will address this issue. 16:49:10 https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues/453 16:49:20 if shigeya doesn't get to that I will, on my list 16:49:41 brent: This is a race between amy and shigeya on who wants to raise a PR first. 16:50:06 we just rescheduled it for this time TOMORROW 16:50:06 https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues/119 16:50:18 rhiaro is on the TAG (for the minutes) 16:50:44 https://github.com/w3c/did-core/issues/549 16:50:46 manu: I've made a pass through the spec and noted testability of sections 16:50:56 ... there's around 153 normative MUST statements in the spec 16:51:03 ... 43 of those are in the resolution and dereferencing section 16:51:12 ... we had stated a while ago that it's an abstract function, so there are questions around its testability 16:51:19 ... people are saying it is, which it could be 16:51:25 ... we need someone to step forward to write those stests 16:51:37 ... and then we need at least two people to say they're going to be implementing the resolution and dereferencing sections 16:51:48 ... you're implementing something that can make those normative statements real 16:51:51 ... need more feedback in that issue 16:51:59 ... there are multiple options provided to address these concerns 16:52:25 Topic: Use Cases 16:52:38 phila: Very quickly will show you where we've gotten to 16:52:50 -> https://w3c.github.io/did-use-cases/ UCR 16:53:18 -> https://w3c.github.io/did-use-cases/#domainMap 16:53:20 phila: Added a diagram -- SVG 16:53:27 JoeAndrieu: Looks good -- domain map 16:54:12 phila: Do please take a look at actions imagery -- attempts to give you simple diagramatic views of how DIDs work and so on -- keen to hear if there are mistakes there -- Joe's been through them, if you see errors, please let us know. 16:54:55 phila: There are focal use cases beyond end of documents, things are autogenerated to reduce editing errors -- we're very aware that DID Core is headed to Candidate Recommendation, and once that happens Use Cases are done -- we're keeping that in mind. 16:55:23 q+ to thank Joe and Phil for their work. 16:55:38 +1 to better readability in SVG 16:56:01 ivan: The letters in the SVG are a bit hard to read 16:56:06 phila: Yes, will try to fix this 16:56:15 ack manu 16:56:15 manu, you wanted to thank Joe and Phil for their work. 16:56:43 Huge +++1 to Joe and Phil's work on this doc! 16:56:44 manu: a big thankyou to joe and phil and anyone who participated n the use cases, we're very lucky to have you work on the document, and the DID and VC ecosystem has some of the better use case documentation around that we've seen working groups generate 16:56:46 +1 thanks to Joe and Phil! 16:57:03 brent: With that, we can close todays meeting 16:57:16 brent: Thank you everyone for all the work being put in -- we appreciate you all very much. 16:57:30 brent: Thanks all! 16:57:47 rrsagent, draft minutes 16:57:47 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2021/01/19-did-minutes.html ivan 17:07:40 zakim, end meeting 17:07:40 As of this point the attendees have been ivan, brent, justin_r, markus_sabadello, rhiaro, shigeya, phila, dmitriz, dlongley, drummond, agropper, jonathan, TallTed, jonathan_holt, 17:07:43 ... manu, JoeAndrieu 17:07:43 RRSAgent, please draft minutes 17:07:43 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2021/01/19-did-minutes.html Zakim 17:07:45 rrsagent, bye 17:07:45 I see no action items 17:07:46 I am happy to have been of service, ivan; please remember to excuse RRSAgent. Goodbye