14:51:43 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #vcwg
14:51:43 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2022/10/19-vcwg-irc
14:51:45 <Zakim> RRSAgent, make logs Public
14:51:46 <Zakim> please title this meeting ("meeting: ..."), ivan
14:52:16 <ivan> Meeting: Verifiable Credentials Working Group Telco
14:52:17 <ivan> Date: 2022-10-19
14:52:17 <ivan> Agenda: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-vc-wg/2022Oct/0006.html
14:52:17 <ivan> chair: brent
14:52:17 <ivan> ivan has changed the topic to: Meeting Agenda 2022-10-19: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-vc-wg/2022Oct/0006.html
14:55:46 <TallTed> TallTed has joined #vcwg
14:55:50 <mprorock> mprorock has joined #vcwg
14:59:21 <DavidC> DavidC has joined #vcwg
14:59:28 <DavidC> present+
14:59:31 <mprorock> present+
14:59:57 <ivan> present+
15:01:02 <shigeya> present+
15:01:03 <Orie> Orie has joined #vcwg
15:01:07 <ivan> present+ orie
15:01:10 <brentz> brentz has joined #vcwg
15:01:13 <ivan> present+ brent
15:01:17 <TallTed> present+
15:01:18 <brentz> present+
15:01:21 <ivan> present+ dlongley
15:01:46 <ivan> present+ elfors
15:01:49 <ivan> present+ manu
15:02:04 <ivan> present+ markus
15:02:09 <ivan> present+ dmitri
15:02:18 <will> will has joined #vcwg
15:03:07 <ivan> present+ kevin
15:03:21 <sebastianelfors> sebastianelfors has joined #vcwg
15:03:31 <brentz> scribe+ DavidC
15:03:36 <kdeangs1> kdeangs1 has joined #vcwg
15:03:48 <ivan> present+ Phil-ASU
15:03:49 <DavidC> Agenda: Status Updates
15:03:54 <ivan> prsent+ abramson
15:04:02 <ivan> topic: status updates
15:04:15 <ivan> s/Agenda: Status Updates//
15:04:18 <manu> q+
15:04:24 <brentz> ack manu
15:04:34 <ivan> present+ snorre
15:04:40 <Phil> Phil has joined #vcwg
15:04:44 <kristina_> kristina_ has joined #vcwg
15:05:00 <DavidC> Manu: We should add @context discussion to the agenda
15:06:05 <snorre_> snorre_ has joined #vcwg
15:06:10 <ivan> present+ oliver
15:06:13 <oliver> oliver has joined #vcwg
15:06:17 <oliver> present+ oliver
15:06:25 <snorre_> present+ snorre
15:06:33 <DavidC> phil long: I am representing T3 innovation network
15:06:44 <ivan> present+ kerri
15:06:57 <brentz> Topic: Work Item status updates/PRs
15:06:58 <DavidC> ... I participate in various W3C working groups and CCG
15:07:03 <manu> q+
15:07:09 <brentz> ack manu
15:07:10 <ivan> s/phil long/phillip_long/
15:07:14 <DavidC> topic: issues and PRs
15:07:36 <kristina__> kristina__ has joined #vcwg
15:07:38 <DavidC> Manu: only one PR pending
15:07:40 <shawnb> shawnb has joined #vcwg
15:08:24 <Orie> Link to issue being discussed in the minutes please.
15:08:29 <DavidC> ... pr#943
15:08:29 <Phil> I should have added I'm the facilitator of the LER Network of the T3 (LER= Learning and Employment Records, that subset of VCs relevant to education, training and professional development).
15:08:33 <mprorock> yes please
15:08:55 <DavidC> ... we have a couple of objections which we are currently resolving
15:09:03 <dlongley> https://github.com/w3c/vc-data-model/pull/943
15:09:36 <Karen> Karen has joined #vcwg
15:09:51 <DavidC> ... orie's objection (human readable descriptions) will be added
15:09:54 <mprorock> q+
15:10:08 <brentz> ack mprorock
15:10:20 <DavidC> ... other one to removing from base @context is not easy to resolve
15:10:42 <Orie> q+
15:10:48 <brentz> ack Orie
15:10:50 <DavidC> mprorock: I appreciate the problem so I will withdraw the change requests
15:11:09 <DavidC> orie: dont like PRs to be made that dont lead to anywhere
15:11:14 <ivan> q+
15:11:24 <DavidC> ... but dont have a blocking change
15:11:38 <brentz> ack ivan
15:11:39 <DavidC> manu: thankyou guys
15:11:48 <ivan> -> Initial work for the vocabulary: https://github.com/w3c/vc-data-integrity/pull/65
15:12:19 <przemek> przemek has joined #vcwg
15:12:26 <decentralgabe> decentralgabe has joined #vcwg
15:12:36 <decentralgabe> present+
15:12:37 <DavidC> ivan: there is quite a lot of work still to be done, so if we keep 943 open till resolved it might be quite a long time
15:13:07 <DavidC> ... I am pushing people to help on vocabulary ASAP
15:13:18 <ivan> subtopic: https://github.com/w3c/vc-data-integrity/pull/63
15:13:19 <manu> https://github.com/w3c/vc-data-integrity/pull/63
15:13:41 <dlongley> q+
15:13:50 <DavidC> manu: still trying to figure out what the text might be for this
15:13:54 <markus_sabadello> markus_sabadello has joined #vcwg
15:14:03 <DavidC> ... we will remove the current wrong language
15:14:38 <DavidC> ... key thing is that the way verify hash is created in BBS will be different to all other crypto suites
15:15:09 <brentz> ack dlongley
15:15:10 <markus_sabadello> q+
15:15:18 <DavidC> ... its hard to predict what will happen with BBS so getting the language right now will be difficult
15:15:24 <brentz> ack markus_sabadello
15:15:52 <DavidC> markus_sabadello: might fit into ridge working group
15:16:05 <brentz> s/ridge/RCH/
15:16:05 <dlongley> s/ridge/RCH/
15:16:29 <DavidC> manu: we will remove the wrong text now. Worst case is that every crypto algorithm might have to use same text
15:16:31 <ivan> subtopic: https://github.com/w3c/vc-data-integrity/pull/64
15:16:45 <ivan> present+ Przemek
15:17:02 <DavidC> manu: this is just updating the language
15:17:13 <ivan> suptopic: https://github.com/w3c/vc-data-integrity/pull/65
15:17:46 <DavidC> manu: do we want to externalise the libraries for vocabularies
15:17:47 <ivan> s/suptopic/subtopic/
15:17:47 <ivan> q+
15:17:57 <brentz> ack ivan
15:18:41 <DavidC> ivan: the most important thing is that the whole doc with proper vocabulary was based on CCG document with not a good description
15:18:44 <manu> Yes, the CCG document is in a half-baked state... it represents a decade of stuff that's been added. :)
15:18:56 <manu> q+ to volunteer to "properly review"
15:19:15 <DavidC> ... there are a number of properties that say 'to be done'
15:19:29 <brentz> ack manu
15:19:29 <Zakim> manu, you wanted to volunteer to "properly review"
15:19:47 <ivan> present+ kristina
15:20:00 <ivan> present+ shawn
15:20:00 <DavidC> manu: I am happy to do a full detailed review as I have been maintaining the vocabulary for a decade
15:20:14 <ivan> subtopic: FPWD?
15:20:30 <ivan> present+ JoeAndrieu
15:20:33 <DavidC> ... once these PRs are merged we will be ready to FPWD
15:21:12 <DavidC> ... target date the end of October
15:21:25 <ivan> q+
15:21:31 <DavidC> ... is the WG Ok with me preparing the FPWD
15:21:37 <brentz> ack ivan
15:21:50 <DavidC> ivan: the final static version should only be done after we have voted for it
15:21:51 <Orie> +1 ivan.
15:22:12 <DavidC> manu: can we vote on next week's call
15:22:38 <DavidC> ivan: I wont be here next week so please dont forget short names
15:23:37 <Orie> echidna
15:23:55 <DavidC> ... to have the publication done by echidnda
15:24:12 <Orie> q+
15:24:13 <TallTed> s/echidnda/echidna/
15:24:18 <brentz> ack Orie
15:24:21 <ivan> subtopic: jwt
15:24:43 <Orie> https://github.com/w3c/vc-jwt/pull/11
15:25:00 <DavidC> Orie: there are changes requested on this
15:25:36 <DavidC> ... not sure when FPWD will be ready
15:26:11 <DavidC> ... please submit all your comments ASAP
15:26:11 <Orie> https://github.com/w3c/vc-jws-2020/pull/24
15:26:14 <ivan> subtopic: vcjs 2020
15:26:27 <DavidC> ... no changes requested for this
15:26:50 <DavidC> manu: there is an objection
15:27:07 <DavidC> ... use fully qualified URLs
15:27:10 <dlongley> q+
15:27:32 <brentz> ack dlongley
15:27:40 <DavidC> Orie: please make it clear what change you request
15:27:54 <DavidC> dlongley: I also have a change request
15:27:57 <dmitriz> dmitriz has joined #vcwg
15:28:37 <brentz> subtopic: https://github.com/w3c/vc-jws-2020/pull/24
15:28:55 <DavidC> Orie: this pull request is trying to point to IANA for term definitions
15:29:46 <DavidC> ... IANA is required to maintain these registeries rather than a community group re-direction service
15:29:56 <JoeAndrieu> JoeAndrieu has joined #vcwg
15:30:09 <JoeAndrieu> present+
15:30:10 <DavidC> ... concern is if people add their own terms which are not defined in IANA
15:30:26 <manu> q+ to note where the objection comes from.
15:30:34 <DavidC> ... but if they get widely used then they are usually evenutually registered
15:31:45 <DavidC> ... sometimes we use an algorithm name but then stop using it and it does not get registered
15:32:22 <DavidC> ... because it is superceded and the new term gets registered at IANA
15:32:26 <brentz> ack manu
15:32:26 <Zakim> manu, you wanted to note where the objection comes from.
15:33:10 <DavidC> manu: biggest issue is the use of vocabulary. With this PR we are saying you can put anything into a JWK which will be in the IANA registry
15:33:44 <DavidC> ... when we are doing crypto we should be very specific with our terms so there is no ambiguity
15:34:50 <DavidC> ... The alternative is if the PR said which parts of the JOSE registry we are using, and is precise, without including everything.
15:35:11 <DavidC> ... because the way the PR is now you can use prohibited terms and terms that are not defined
15:35:42 <Orie> Please make sure to put your concrete change suggestions on the PR and request changes, so I can address each of them individually.
15:35:54 <manu> Sure thing.
15:36:07 <brentz> Topic: Issue Discussion
15:36:07 <manu> Though, I did just elaborate on them here, in the minutes, which should be included in the PR
15:36:14 <DavidC> topic: issue discussion
15:36:23 <manu> q+
15:36:49 <brentz> ack manu
15:37:26 <DavidC> manu: original issue has come from TPAC, but it seemed as if there were two separate issues.
15:37:38 <brentz> https://github.com/w3c/vc-data-model/issues/947
15:37:45 <DavidC> ... first one requests @context to be optional
15:38:18 <DavidC> ... second one it to enhance developer experience of JSON-LD by limiting JSON-LD functionality
15:38:27 <brentz> https://github.com/w3c/vc-data-model/issues/948
15:38:36 <DavidC> ... so that a JSON only developer wont need to worry about JSON-LD processing
15:38:52 <kristina__> I think it was correct to break down the original TPAC tracking issue into two, but will point out that a lot of good conversation is in that original issue that is now closed is not translated into the new issues. so will encourage folks to re-comment/re-engage.
15:39:41 <DavidC> ... intention is that you wont need a JSON-LD processor to use @context
15:40:07 <DavidC> ... done by adding a developer @context, but this should not be used in production
15:40:48 <brentz> https://github.com/w3c/vc-data-model/issues?q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+label%3Adiscuss+sort%3Aupdated-asc
15:40:53 <DavidC> brentz: folks should read the original issue for background and good information
15:41:22 <brentz> subtopic: https://github.com/w3c/vc-data-model/issues/709
15:42:05 <manu> q+
15:42:12 <dmitriz> q+
15:42:12 <brentz> ack manu
15:42:14 <DavidC> brentz: revolves around whether issuer is an object or not
15:42:16 <manu> https://github.com/w3c/vc-data-model/issues/709#issuecomment-1218401700
15:42:32 <DavidC> manu: I like Orie's comment above
15:43:16 <brentz> ack dmitriz
15:43:17 <DavidC> ... can we close the issue and raise a simpler one
15:43:36 <DavidC> brentz: suggested you ask Tony
15:44:13 <manu> q+
15:44:15 <DavidC> dmitriz: the current text also is problemmatic
15:44:39 <manu> q+ to note that we already allow issuer as object in vc-data-model -- so, confused about what concrete change we're talking about making to the spec.
15:44:40 <DavidC> ... in OpenBadges 3 we make extensive use of issuer as an object
15:45:01 <DavidC> ... also useful if two issuers are jointly issuing a diploma
15:45:20 <DavidC> ... 'compound issuers'
15:45:24 <brentz> ack manu
15:45:24 <Zakim> manu, you wanted to note that we already allow issuer as object in vc-data-model -- so, confused about what concrete change we're talking about making to the spec.
15:45:34 <dmitriz> q+
15:45:45 <DavidC> manu: what is the problem since today we allow it to be an object
15:45:46 <Orie> Does not look like that was scribed.
15:45:49 <brentz> ack dmitriz
15:45:57 <DavidC> ... what is the concrete change you are requesting
15:46:15 <DavidC> dmitriz: add examples to the VC spec that have issuer as an object
15:46:17 <manu> q+ to note we have an example w/ an expanded issuer.
15:46:32 <ivan> q+
15:46:32 <manu> q+ to common fields for name, image, description, etc.
15:46:35 <DavidC> ... add common fields of name, image, web site to v2 context
15:46:51 <dlongley> https://www.w3.org/TR/vc-data-model/#example-usage-of-issuer-expanded-property
15:46:53 <brentz> ack manu
15:46:53 <Zakim> manu, you wanted to note we have an example w/ an expanded issuer. and to common fields for name, image, description, etc.
15:46:55 <DavidC> ... open an issue to discuss compound issuers
15:47:20 <DavidC> manu: we have an example in the spec of a compound issuer
15:47:24 <kristina__> there is a multi-issuer issuer by gabe too: https://github.com/w3c/vc-data-model/issues/932
15:47:34 <DavidC> dmitriz: please add image and name to this
15:47:37 <Orie> my favorite field to add to the `issuer` block is a postal address and email address.
15:47:56 <dmitriz> +1 for the latter
15:48:02 <DavidC> manu: should image be under the issuer or as a top level property that can be used anywhere
15:48:13 <brentz> ack ivan
15:48:45 <DavidC> ivan: I dont think we should come up with another vocabularly for person
15:48:51 <DavidC> dmitriz: sure, use schema.org
15:49:00 <brentz> subtopic: https://github.com/w3c/vc-data-model/issues/709
15:49:04 <brentz> subtopic: https://github.com/w3c/vc-data-model/issues/762
15:49:38 <manu> q+
15:49:45 <brentz> ack manu
15:49:49 <DavidC> this issue is whether a subject can only be a string value
15:50:06 <DavidC> manu: No we should not allow subject to be only a string value
15:50:09 <oliver> +1 manu
15:50:46 <brentz> subtopic: https://github.com/w3c/vc-data-model/issues/862
15:51:07 <DavidC> url vs uri
15:51:13 <manu> q+
15:51:28 <brentz> ack manu
15:51:58 <ivan> q+
15:52:01 <DavidC> manu: this is an old discussion about url vs iri vs uri
15:52:36 <DavidC> ... so maybe we should move to using url as this is used by browsers and is ubiquitous
15:52:51 <brentz> ack ivan
15:53:19 <DavidC> ivan: tendency in W3C is to move towards url spec
15:53:36 <dlongley> +1 to ivan, implementations use the WHATWG spec
15:53:45 <brentz> subtopic: https://github.com/w3c/vc-data-model/issues/839
15:54:02 <manu> scribe+
15:54:16 <oliver> q+
15:54:18 <manu> DavidC: I haven't looked at this for some time.
15:54:44 <oliver> q-
15:54:50 <manu> DavidC: I think there was an agreement, that what I'm looking for is presentationSchema, which is equivalent for credentialSchema -- that will tell RP whether VP has been properly formed or not.
15:54:51 <Orie> +1 david, that is my understanding of your request.
15:55:02 <oliver> q+
15:55:03 <manu> q+ to concern about schemas set by attackers.
15:55:20 <manu> DavidC: The proposal was to have a presentationSchema property.
15:55:28 <brentz> ack oliver
15:55:43 <brentz> ack manu
15:55:43 <Zakim> manu, you wanted to concern about schemas set by attackers.
15:56:10 <DavidC> manu: thinks it lets an attacker choose the schema
15:56:26 <ivan> rrsagent, draft minutes
15:56:26 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2022/10/19-vcwg-minutes.html ivan
15:56:39 <ivan> rrsagent, draft minutes
15:56:39 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2022/10/19-vcwg-minutes.html ivan
15:57:03 <ivan> zakim, end meeting
15:57:03 <Zakim> As of this point the attendees have been DavidC, mprorock, ivan, shigeya, orie, brent, TallTed, brentz, dlongley, elfors, manu, markus, dmitri, kevin, Phil-ASU, snorre, oliver,
15:57:06 <Zakim> ... kerri, decentralgabe, Przemek, kristina, shawn, JoeAndrieu
15:57:06 <Zakim> RRSAgent, please draft minutes
15:57:06 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2022/10/19-vcwg-minutes.html Zakim
15:57:08 <Zakim> I am happy to have been of service, ivan; please remember to excuse RRSAgent.  Goodbye
15:57:13 <Zakim> Zakim has left #vcwg
15:58:04 <ivan> rrsagent, bye
15:58:04 <RRSAgent> I see no action items