14:55:06 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #vcwg
14:55:10 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2023/06/14-vcwg-irc
14:55:18 <brent> zakim, start the meeting
14:55:18 <Zakim> RRSAgent, make logs Public
14:55:20 <Zakim> please title this meeting ("meeting: ..."), brent
14:55:35 <ivan> ivan has joined #vcwg
14:55:38 <brent> meeting: Verifiable Credentials Working Group Weekly Teleconference
14:55:48 <brent> chair: Kristina Yasuda
14:55:55 <brent> present+
14:56:03 <ivan> Agenda: https://www.w3.org/events/meetings/ae05a21b-c065-4e69-8d5e-352a0d391513/20230614T11000
14:58:21 <mprorock> mprorock has joined #vcwg
14:59:10 <hsano> hsano has joined #vcwg
14:59:14 <ivan> present+
14:59:14 <ivan> present+ mprorock
15:00:06 <cabernet> cabernet has joined #vcwg
15:00:10 <hsano> present+
15:00:37 <ivan> present+ selfissued, cabernet
15:00:51 <PhilF> PhilF has joined #vcwg
15:00:51 <ivan> present+ orie
15:00:57 <PhilF> present+
15:00:58 <cabernet> present+
15:01:06 <ivan> present+ TallTed
15:01:53 <ivan> present+ davidc
15:02:24 <DavidC> DavidC has joined #vcwg
15:02:27 <ivan> present+ andres
15:02:28 <DavidC> present+
15:02:57 <ivan> present+ kristina
15:03:15 <JoeAndrieu> JoeAndrieu has joined #vcwg
15:03:32 <ivan> present+ mircea
15:03:37 <ivan> present+ JoeAndrieu
15:03:41 <kristina> kristina has joined #vcwg
15:03:43 <kristina> present+
15:03:55 <ivan> present+ manu
15:04:01 <Orie> Orie has joined #vcwg
15:04:03 <andres> andres has joined #vcwg
15:04:03 <Orie> present+
15:04:08 <andres> present+
15:04:18 <ivan> present+ kgriffin
15:04:27 <kgriffin> kgriffin has joined #vcwg
15:04:35 <mircea_nistor> mircea_nistor has joined #vcwg
15:04:45 <Will> Will has joined #vcwg
15:04:49 <ivan> present+ abramson
15:05:08 <ivan> present+ dlongley
15:06:40 <Orie> I can scribe
15:06:42 <Orie> scribe+
15:06:51 <ivan> present+ shawnb
15:07:07 <selfissued> selfissued has joined #vcwg
15:07:18 <brent> scribe+ kgriffin
15:07:22 <selfissued> present+
15:07:42 <TallTed> RRSAgent, draft minutes
15:07:43 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/06/14-vcwg-minutes.html TallTed
15:07:50 <kgriffin> kristina: agenda PR and issue dicussion
15:08:15 <kgriffin> kristina: any introductions?
15:08:26 <manu> q+ to go through PRs.
15:08:40 <kristina> topic: status update, PRs
15:08:44 <kristina> ack manu
15:08:44 <Zakim> manu, you wanted to go through PRs.
15:08:52 <kristina> https://github.com/w3c/vc-data-model/pulls?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Apr+-label%3A%22pending+close%22+-label%3Adiscuss+sort%3Aupdated-asc
15:09:00 <manu> https://github.com/w3c/vc-data-model/pulls
15:09:33 <Orie> I opened PRs to prepare to do all that .
15:09:34 <kgriffin> manu: VCDM PRs we have pulls open, 1054 mrked pending close, moving to CCG what is the status? Oliver is on vaction though.
15:10:14 <Orie> The PRs I opened can't be merged until all that happens.
15:10:23 <kgriffin> manu: Are we adding an entry to reserve holder binding. Manus understanding was to create a CCG work item and then add to the reserved terms and then close 1054
15:10:25 <kristina> s/vaction/vacation
15:10:41 <kgriffin> manu: we still need to CCG item, but we can do the rest in parraellel
15:10:55 <ivan> s/parraellel/parallel/
15:11:08 <mprorock> q+
15:11:55 <ivan> present+ dlehn1
15:12:41 <kristina> ack mprorock
15:12:41 <Orie> scribe+
15:12:55 <Orie> mprorock: suggest we merge first, bikeshed naming an properties econd
15:13:08 <dlongley> q+
15:13:10 <kristina> s/econd/second
15:13:17 <kristina> ack dlongley
15:13:28 <Orie> dlongley: this is not bike shedding, its data modeling... in the information graph
15:13:34 <TallTed> s/naming an properties/naming and properties/
15:13:39 <Orie> ... id is a special property that has specific behavior
15:13:45 <manu> q+
15:13:56 <Orie> ... because of JSON-LD this could impact selective disclosure
15:14:05 <Orie> ... its not just about picking a name
15:14:07 <ivan> present+ gabe
15:14:20 <kristina> ack manu
15:14:22 <Orie> kristina: ask for a special topic call if you need it
15:14:43 <Orie> manu: its not bikeshedding, there are design considerations that effect JSON-LD selective disclosure
15:15:05 <Orie> ... the SRI format is different, its not what SRI does... we should either align with SRI or align with something else
15:15:18 <Orie> ... there are design considerations that effect selective disclosure in JSON-LD nquads.
15:15:28 <ivan> Subresource integrity spec: https://www.w3.org/TR/SRI/
15:16:12 <Orie> manu: I am reviewing the PR now
15:16:25 <Orie> ... people are requesting discussion
15:16:26 <TallTed> TallTed has joined #vcwg
15:16:34 <Orie> q+
15:16:48 <kristina> ack Orie
15:16:50 <manu> scribe+
15:17:03 <manu> Orie: You're open to open a PR to follow best practice.
15:17:58 <Orie> AFAIK there is no bar, right now.
15:18:08 <Orie> no consensus on any bar afaik
15:18:10 <kgriffin> kgriffin has joined #vcwg
15:18:23 <Orie> manu: next PR is 1142
15:18:27 <kristina> subtopic: https://github.com/w3c/vc-data-model/pull/1141
15:18:42 <ivan> s/1141/1142/
15:18:49 <kristina> subtopic: https://github.com/w3c/vc-data-model/pull/1142
15:19:07 <Orie> q+
15:19:12 <TallTed> RRSAgent, draft minutes
15:19:13 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/06/14-vcwg-minutes.html TallTed
15:19:20 <kristina> ack Orie
15:20:28 <manu> Orie: 1142 reserves the confidenceMethod in the JSON-LD Context and adds the confidence method as a JSON member and adds same at-risk reservation dependency. I added a link that we expect to not be 404. Under render, I attempted to link to document that is furthest along wrt. renderMethod. Not transferred to CCG yet. This one adds links and at risk ffeature can read specs.
15:20:48 <Orie> https://github.com/w3c/vc-data-model/pull/1140
15:21:00 <manu> manu: What's 1140 about?
15:22:18 <manu> Orie: Pull 1141 adds an issue marker about debating this particular property and whether we will reserve these things in the core context. This is saying same thing as reserved properties, focuses on property in core context. If we merge other PR, then this issue marker would still remain and at some point confidenceMethod could be removed. That would be the reason to leave issue marker in... never anything documented for this extension point.
15:23:14 <kristina> subtopic: https://github.com/w3c/vc-data-model/pull/1144
15:23:19 <Orie> manu: pull 1144 adds a media type for vps
15:23:44 <Orie> ... expect that to merge soon
15:23:57 <Orie> pull 1149 has questions
15:24:12 <Orie> ... vc data integrity
15:24:28 <kristina> s/pull/... pull
15:24:37 <manu> subtopic: https://github.com/w3c/vc-data-integrity/pull/99
15:24:37 <Orie> ... data integrity has 1 pr on it
15:25:42 <Orie> ... manu we think did core will point to data integrity, there are changes requested
15:26:02 <Orie> ... there are no prs on vc-di-eddsa
15:26:03 <manu> subtopic: https://github.com/w3c/vc-di-ecdsa/pulls
15:26:15 <Orie> ... there are 3 prs on vc-di-ecdsa, we plan to merge all these
15:26:42 <Orie> ... noting we have not been processing the specs dir stuff
15:26:53 <manu> subtopic: https://github.com/w3c/vc-specs-dir/pull/14
15:26:57 <Orie> ... there is 1 pr to add a media types extensions category
15:27:27 <Orie> ... we don't plan on merging this, or closing it, until we discuss other media types
15:27:33 <Orie> ... and transformations
15:27:44 <kristina> ack JoeAndrieu
15:27:54 <Orie> joe: i think the notion of the directory, is that any related specs can go there... don't understand why its blocked
15:28:11 <Orie> manu:  you are correct, the vc specs dir can have anything you want
15:28:32 <Orie> ... we were contemplating adding a media type section, for other people to register transformations...
15:28:49 <Orie> ... we could put transformations in this vc specs dir
15:29:10 <Orie> ... media types are not RDF predicates or types, so we don't understand how to support them
15:29:35 <Orie> joe: seems like we will have media types to related to vcs
15:30:06 <Orie> and schema
15:30:19 <Orie> manu: i forgot about status list
15:30:28 <kristina> no open PRs for https://github.com/w3c/vc-di-eddsa/pulls
15:30:33 <Orie> ... there are 4 open PRs for status lists
15:30:36 <manu> subtopic: https://github.com/w3c/vc-status-list-2021/pull/46
15:30:37 <Orie> ... first 1 is 46
15:30:47 <Orie> ... this was waiting for responses
15:31:18 <Orie> kristina: mike please review the PR
15:31:32 <manu> subtopic: https://github.com/w3c/vc-status-list-2021/pull/65
15:31:51 <Orie> manu : support for multiple status codes... 108 comments so far, revisions requested and made
15:32:05 <Orie> mprorock: we have implementations of this
15:32:13 <Orie> ... I need to review the latest change requests
15:32:21 <Orie> ... some cleanup
15:32:32 <Orie> ... kristina are you asking about size?
15:32:42 <Orie> ... I can incorporate your feedback
15:33:36 <marty_reed> marty_reed has joined #vcwg
15:33:37 <Orie> kristina: i made comments, prefer to have the first fiew status codes always be the same
15:33:50 <Orie> ... there should be no need to sniff content
15:34:11 <Orie> mprorock: this is about attaching status to credential, not verification instructions
15:34:34 <Orie> ... there are a lot of existing status tables, we can't mandate bit codes, or we break interop with those
15:34:47 <ivan> present+ martin_reed
15:34:56 <Orie> ... the intention of this PR was to align with existing regulatory coding schemes
15:35:10 <dlongley> it seems like maybe this isn't the right primitive ... it's a different type of thing in some slight way?
15:35:20 <Orie> kristina: lets take it offline, its a question on where we expect the work to be done, and by who
15:35:33 <dlongley> q+
15:35:35 <manu> +1 to kristina, this feels problematic
15:35:46 <manu> (from a complexity standpoint)
15:35:51 <kristina> q?
15:35:58 <kristina> ack dlongley
15:36:21 <Orie> dlongley: I have similar concerns with kristina, maybe there is a different primitive we should be using
15:36:44 <Orie> manu: seems like a call is needed
15:37:00 <Orie> kristina: do we need a call?
15:37:12 <Orie> mprorock: i'm happy to talk folks through the use cases
15:37:33 <Orie> ... there seems to be cconfusion over what the credentialStatus feature is meant to represent
15:37:47 <manu> subtopic: https://github.com/w3c/vc-status-list-2021/pull/67
15:37:52 <dlongley> yeah, i think credential status has already been a part of "verification", so +1 to sort that out
15:38:23 <Orie> manu: this is an example, I updated the digital bazaar remote script to fix the JSON-LD document loader in the spec
15:38:47 <Orie> ... it should be fine, but we wrote a plugin for the spec
15:39:00 <Orie> ... should we move the open source tool to the ccg, or the vcwg
15:39:09 <Orie> ... its the thing that *does the mapping*
15:39:34 <Orie> ... its a general issue accross all our repos
15:40:00 <manu> subtopic: https://github.com/w3c/vc-status-list-2021/pull/69
15:40:12 <Orie> manu: this modifies the context and data types and things
15:40:27 <Orie> ... i suggest implementers should review, this is a big set of breaking changes
15:40:43 <Orie> ... I plan to request changes, and make sure that this is something we want to do
15:40:54 <Orie> ... it impacts JSON ONLY processing in a negative way
15:41:09 <Orie> ... it looks simple but its related to RDF data processing
15:41:26 <Orie> q+
15:41:34 <kristina> ack Orie
15:41:51 <kristina> Topic: https://github.com/w3c/vc-data-model/issues?q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+sort%3Aupdated-asc
15:41:52 <manu> Orie: There are several open PRs on vc-jwt, I will merge anything with positive reviews after 1 week.
15:42:01 <Orie> kristina: lets do issues
15:42:05 <decentra_> decentra_ has joined #vcwg
15:42:12 <decentra_> present+
15:42:23 <Orie> ... we are going to go through all issues
15:42:34 <kristina> subtopic: https://github.com/w3c/vc-data-model/issues/996
15:43:02 <Orie> kristina: this seems like a question, and should be marked as such
15:43:15 <brent> q+
15:43:20 <Orie> ... can we mark issues that won't change the spec is some way that saves working group time?
15:43:22 <kristina> ack brent
15:43:38 <manu> q+
15:43:43 <Orie> brent: the question has been answered it should be marked pending close
15:43:43 <kristina> ack manu
15:44:01 <Orie> manu: we have not answered the question, I suggest we delete the sentence that causes confusion
15:44:06 <kgriffin> kgriffin has joined #vcwg
15:44:18 <Orie> kristina: i agree, we should delete the sentence, and mark this as ready for PR
15:44:48 <kristina> subtopic: https://github.com/w3c/vc-data-model/issues/1080
15:44:50 <Orie> ... add anchor to each propertty
15:45:08 <dlongley> +1 after CR
15:45:14 <ivan> q+
15:45:19 <Orie> kristina: ok, lets mark after CR
15:45:20 <kristina> ack ivan
15:45:35 <Orie> ivan: in a sense its bound to the discussion yesterday
15:45:48 <Orie> ... if we want to elevate the vocabulary, it will require editing
15:45:58 <Orie> ... and then we would need to move text around
15:46:05 <Orie> ... for me to do this, I need anchors
15:46:16 <Orie> ... so this blocks the normative issues with the vocabulary and context
15:46:22 <mprorock> +1 ivan - may have impacts on normative
15:46:24 <Orie> q+
15:46:34 <Orie> kristina: do you have an issue number?
15:46:56 <kristina> ack Orie
15:47:11 <ivan> q+
15:47:40 <manu> Orie: You don't need anchor tags to reserve URLs, it's common for anchors to not reserve. Agree that proper way to do this is to anchor, we're not doing that already, if we want to make progress on other items, people will need the time to focus on other items. Adding anchor tags on everything feels like less important than other PRs.
15:47:41 <kristina> ack ivan
15:47:47 <manu> ivan: It's 1103, the other issue.
15:48:07 <manu> ivan: When we move to CR, then the documents have to go through all kinds of publication checking and the link checker will shout at us if we use links that don't resolve.
15:48:11 <Orie> ivan: when we move to CR, the document will need linting and that will cause errors
15:48:25 <Orie> kristina: we can do it right before CR
15:48:53 <kristina> subtopic: https://github.com/w3c/vc-data-model/issues/860
15:49:00 <kristina> q?
15:49:18 <kristina> ack JoeAndrieu
15:49:37 <Orie> JoeAndrieu: I think we don't have 2 implementations of this
15:49:41 <Orie> q+
15:49:49 <Orie> ... will other people implement this
15:50:04 <DavidC> q+
15:50:18 <Orie> ... this issue requests definition for a property about other properties
15:50:37 <Orie> ... there is a use case for requesting citizenship documents by providing suplemental credentials
15:50:57 <Orie> ... bascially repeat the concept of credentialSubject for holderClaims...
15:51:24 <Orie> ... there is some conversation on it, I think you can always use an unsigned vC
15:51:26 <griffin> griffin has joined #vcwg
15:51:49 <kristina> ack Orie
15:52:38 <manu> Orie: Just a comment on normative rquiements, proof is optional, party can include additional fields by relying on JSON-LD context, you don't need two independent implemenations to achieve this, you can use reserved terms, if W3C doesn't reserve terms, won't matter in context of standards, if govt. processing, they determine those terms.
15:52:39 <kristina> ack DavidC
15:52:43 <dlongley> q+ to say i think a verifier will need to understand what is being sent and it would be good for them to request a VC from the holder with acceptable claims
15:52:58 <selfissued> selfissued has joined #vcwg
15:53:02 <Orie> DavidC: I noticed a similar requirement a couple months ago, but we never presented at the face to face
15:53:03 <selfissued> present+
15:53:17 <Orie> ... I will point to the defintion we had for this feature
15:53:35 <Orie> ... I have defined examples, maybe we have the same idea, take a look at the slides
15:53:42 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #vcwg
15:54:03 <Orie> DavidC: the slides are follow on related to holder binding
15:54:03 <kristina> q?
15:54:06 <kristina> dlongley
15:54:15 <kristina> s/dlongley/ack dlongley
15:54:36 <Orie> dlongley: seems like the verifier won't accept arbitrary properties
15:54:45 <Orie> ... seems like an additional credential use case
15:54:59 <Orie> ... where the holder issuers a self asserted credential
15:55:19 <Orie> ... and then the verifier will process self signed credentials from the holder wallet
15:55:45 <selfissued> I approved status-list PR #46 with https://github.com/w3c/vc-status-list-2021/pull/46#pullrequestreview-1479814962
15:55:56 <Orie> ... i think we have the tools to make this happen, we don't need new reserved W3C terms
15:56:21 <Orie> kristina: maybe leave a comment regarding the proposed paths forward
15:56:49 <Orie> Joe: DavidC can you leave a comment on the issue, unless there is something to fight for, we should close it
15:57:14 <Orie> kristina: thanks all
15:57:18 <DavidC> see https://www.w3.org/2017/vc/WG/Meetings/F2F/VCWG_Miami_F2F_2023.pdf
15:57:25 <Orie> ... please review PRs and issues outside of call time
15:57:47 <Orie> ... next week's special topic call will be status list codes, or 1100 1101 PRs regarding mapping and content types
15:57:54 <ivan> rrsagent, draft minutes
15:57:55 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/06/14-vcwg-minutes.html ivan
15:58:18 <DavidC> Slides are titled Alt Holder Binding
15:58:54 <ivan> rrsagent, draft minutes
15:58:55 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/06/14-vcwg-minutes.html ivan
15:59:11 <ivan> zakim, bye
15:59:11 <Zakim> leaving.  As of this point the attendees have been brent, ivan, mprorock, hsano, selfissued, cabernet, orie, PhilF, TallTed, davidc, andres, kristina, mircea, JoeAndrieu, manu,
15:59:11 <Zakim> Zakim has left #vcwg
15:59:14 <Zakim> ... kgriffin, abramson, dlongley, shawnb, dlehn1, gabe, martin_reed, decentra_
15:59:16 <ivan> rrsagent, bye
15:59:16 <RRSAgent> I see no action items