14:50:04 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #vcwg
14:50:09 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2023/08/09-vcwg-irc
14:50:09 <Zakim> RRSAgent, make logs Public
14:50:10 <Zakim> please title this meeting ("meeting: ..."), ivan
14:50:20 <ivan> Meeting: Verifiable Credentials Working Group Telco
14:50:20 <ivan> Date: 2023-08-09
14:50:20 <ivan> Agenda: https://www.w3.org/events/meetings/ae05a21b-c065-4e69-8d5e-352a0d391513/20230809T110000/
14:50:20 <ivan> chair: brent
14:50:20 <ivan> ivan has changed the topic to: Meeting Agenda 2023-08-09: https://www.w3.org/events/meetings/ae05a21b-c065-4e69-8d5e-352a0d391513/20230809T110000/
14:53:02 <TallTed> Same link is in the agenda for all three of work items, issue triage, and issue discussion... It seems these should differ?
14:54:30 <brent> brent has joined #vcwg
14:54:41 <TallTed> brent -- Same link is in the agenda for all three of work items, issue triage, and issue discussion... It seems these should differ?
14:58:10 <ivan> present+
14:58:22 <ivan> present+ brent, TallTed
14:59:31 <hsano> hsano has joined #vcwg
14:59:41 <pl-ASU> pl-ASU has joined #vcwg
15:00:56 <hsano> present+
15:01:10 <ivan> present+ hsano
15:01:12 <GregB> GregB has joined #vcwg
15:01:20 <GregB> present+
15:01:47 <ivan> present+ benjamin, orie, seabass
15:01:48 <TallTed> s/brent -- Same link is in the agenda for all three of work items, issue triage, and issue discussion... It seems these should differ?//
15:01:58 <ivan> present+ pl-ASU
15:02:06 <andres> andres has joined #vcwg
15:02:13 <ivan> present+ kristina
15:02:43 <kristina> kristina has joined #vcwg
15:02:47 <kristina> present+
15:02:58 <dlongley> present+
15:03:23 <ivan> chair: kristina
15:03:33 <ivan> present+ andres
15:03:37 <dmitriz> dmitriz has joined #vcwg
15:03:59 <bigbluehat> present+
15:04:18 <dmitriz> present+
15:04:18 <ivan> present+ PaulD
15:04:24 <Paul_Dietrich_GS1> Paul_Dietrich_GS1 has joined #vcwg
15:04:26 <ivan> present+ dlongley
15:04:59 <Orie> Orie has joined #vcwg
15:05:06 <pl-ASU> present+
15:05:30 <ivan> present+ selfissued
15:05:36 <ivan> present+ manu
15:05:56 <ivan> scribe+ GregB
15:06:05 <seabass> present+
15:06:39 <GregB> Testing scribing from GregB
15:06:43 <TallTed> present+
15:06:56 <manu> s/Testing scribing from GregB//
15:06:57 <kristina> me: GregB: greg said xxx
15:07:22 <GregB> Kristina: let's start rolling...
15:07:39 <cabernet> cabernet has joined #vcwg
15:07:42 <ivan> present+ cabernet
15:07:42 <cabernet> present+
15:07:47 <TallTed> q+
15:08:02 <GregB> Kristina: for today -- PRs, new issues, status upates
15:08:02 <kristina> ack TallTed
15:08:19 <GregB> TallTed: issue with the links for discussion
15:08:51 <kgriffin> kgriffin has joined #vcwg
15:09:03 <kristina> topic: updates on test suites
15:09:33 <GregB> brent: conformance testing -- a number of test suites developed in CCG, create repo for these in WG
15:09:37 <ivan> present+ griffin
15:09:53 <JoeAndrieu> JoeAndrieu has joined #vcwg
15:10:13 <ivan> present+ JoeAndrieu
15:10:14 <GregB> brent: Test suites -- VC schemas, and status lists. Recommends reviewing if you couldn't attend.
15:10:30 <TallTed> link to those minutes?
15:10:41 <kristina> Topic: PRs
15:10:43 <kristina> https://github.com/w3c/vc-data-model/pulls?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Apr+-label%3A%22pending+close%22+-label%3Adiscuss+sort%3Aupdated-asc
15:10:55 <manu> q+
15:10:59 <kristina> ack manu
15:11:08 <brent> Link to special topic call minutes: https://www.w3.org/2017/vc/WG/Meetings/Minutes/2023-08-08-vcwg-special
15:11:13 <manu> subtopic: https://github.com/w3c/vc-data-model/pull/1172
15:11:42 <decentralgabe> decentralgabe has joined #vcwg
15:11:44 <Orie> q+
15:11:47 <ivan> present+ gabe
15:11:52 <GregB> manu: VC data model PRs -- #1172 unclear where we are on this PR, Orie change suggestions, TallTed too. Getting to close soon?
15:11:54 <kristina> ack Orie
15:12:42 <GregB> orie: Don't know if it will get to a PR that is better than current text. It's ?? that is managing this PR.
15:13:10 <JoeAndrieu> q+
15:13:25 <kristina> ack JoeAndrieu
15:13:50 <manu> q+ to note subjects are not entities.
15:13:56 <TallTed> q+
15:13:57 <Orie> +1 JoeAndrieu, I agree with your comment
15:13:58 <GregB> JoeAndrieu?: Issue on terminology...
15:14:03 <kristina> q?
15:14:14 <manu> q-
15:14:17 <ivan> s/?:/:/
15:14:22 <kristina> ack TallTed
15:14:50 <GregB> TallTed: not sure where "entity" has been defined (in RDF)...
15:15:06 <manu> subtopic: https://github.com/w3c/vc-data-model/pull/1199
15:15:35 <GregB> manu: PR 1199, about validation section on "holder", waiting on JoeAndrieu feedback
15:16:05 <Orie> q+ to agree on the validation vs verification
15:16:11 <GregB> JoeAndrieu: not sure where I'm at, "validation" versus "verification", no new comments from 3 weeks ago
15:16:15 <kristina> ack Orie
15:16:15 <Zakim> Orie, you wanted to agree on the validation vs verification
15:16:44 <GregB> Orie: Agree "validation/verification", can file an issue, Joe agrees
15:16:51 <manu> subtopic: https://github.com/w3c/vc-data-model/pull/1202
15:17:06 <identitywoman> identitywoman has joined #vcwg
15:17:10 <ivan> present+ identitywoman
15:17:11 <identitywoman> present+
15:17:56 <seabass> q+
15:18:00 <GregB> manu: PR 1202, everyone  who needs to reviewed has reviewed, need JSON/JSON-LD processing section, conflicts needs to be resolved, plan to merge tomorrow
15:18:03 <kristina> ack seabass
15:18:23 <GregB> sebastian: What script? Ivan: that's my script
15:18:36 <GregB> ivan: don't have to minutes that!!!
15:18:51 <manu> subtopic: https://github.com/w3c/vc-data-model/pull/1211
15:18:51 <TallTed> s/ivan: don't have to minutes that!!!//
15:18:57 <TallTed> s/sebastian: What script? Ivan: that's my script//
15:19:46 <GregB> manu: PR 1211  "abstract concepts" trying to get agreement with Orie and David Chadwick. Media types...
15:19:56 <Orie> q+
15:20:11 <kristina> ack Orie
15:20:24 <manu> q+
15:20:41 <GregB> orie: "testable difference" between the two concepts... Feeling mushy
15:21:45 <GregB> orie: media type distinguishable, RDF, english sentence, securing mechanism, duration of proof vs information
15:22:01 <GregB> orie: not sure how to fix
15:22:08 <kristina> ack manu
15:23:02 <GregB> manu: Will propose concrete text. One is secure, one is not, or ability to be secured; Can door be locked, does  it have a door...
15:23:06 <seabass> q+ to add analogy
15:24:14 <GregB> manu: Three interpretations floating around and they don't line up. Depending on the securing mechanism may has "proof" on it. JWT and SD-JWT don't have proof on them
15:24:54 <selfissued> selfissued has joined #vcwg
15:25:05 <selfissued> present+
15:25:17 <kristina> q?
15:25:20 <GregB> manu: okay to have prose that says VC must be secured. We can test it... Concrete suggestion/testable. Can Ted/Orie/DavidC agree?
15:25:21 <kristina> ack seabass
15:25:21 <Zakim> seabass, you wanted to add analogy
15:25:24 <Orie> I'm not sure its testable, but I hope it can be made testable
15:25:42 <Orie> perhaps it will become more obvious with better text
15:25:43 <selfissued> q+
15:25:53 <kristina> q?
15:25:57 <seabass> q+
15:26:29 <GregB> manu: its absolutely testable. Run a verification algorithm. Know which algorithm to run
15:26:30 <andres> You can run algorithms on anything, which is why that test is problematic IMHO.
15:27:23 <kristina> ack seabass
15:28:24 <GregB> seabass: Analogy -- Safe is secure, sledge hamer breaks safe, transfer to VC world, if alg is later insecure it still was a VC
15:28:26 <kristina> ack selfissued
15:28:28 <kristina> q?
15:28:47 <manu> yes, +1000 selfissued !
15:28:51 <TallTed> q+
15:28:51 <manu> q+
15:29:00 <GregB> MikeJones: agree with Manu. If crypto signed verifiable if not no.
15:29:16 <JoeAndrieu> +1 to that language
15:29:17 <Orie> q+
15:29:19 <GregB> manu: plus 1000 to Mike Jones.
15:29:25 <pl-ASU> +1 to selfissued
15:29:25 <kristina> ack TallTed
15:29:25 <GregB> +1
15:29:44 <dlongley> +1 if this doesn't trigger a bunch of other changes, i'm happy with that solution
15:29:51 <manu> q-
15:29:57 <kristina> why can't we clarify it's "cryptographicaly verifiable" credential
15:30:14 <kristina> ack Orie
15:30:14 <manu> that might work as well, kristina
15:30:17 <GregB> TalTed: if it remains that loose, I can live with it. If the crypto needs to be at a certain level that is different
15:30:19 <dlongley> maybe we can add "cryptographically" before "verifiable credential" to solve this like kristina said.
15:30:23 <manu> depends on how far down the rabbit hole we want to go.
15:30:32 <selfissued> q+
15:30:49 <JoeAndrieu> q+ to say we, the W3C, are the people that vet W3C VCs
15:30:57 <GregB> orie: agree, the abstract concept of "proof", versus the terminology "proof" in our defs
15:31:22 <kristina> q?
15:31:30 <kristina> ack selfissued
15:31:31 <GregB> orie: in summary keeping it higher level and not using word proof...
15:31:49 <kristina> ack JoeAndrieu
15:31:49 <Zakim> JoeAndrieu, you wanted to say we, the W3C, are the people that vet W3C VCs
15:31:52 <GregB> MikeJones: agree, keep it simple, omit use of word proof
15:32:04 <seabass> +1 JoeAndrieu (IRC)
15:32:22 <GregB> JoeAndrieu: on vetting securing mechanisms, that is us (W3C)
15:32:27 <manu> q+
15:32:31 <kristina> ack manu
15:32:35 <manu> q+
15:32:39 <TallTed> -1 we're not sufficiently crypto expert to perform this vetting, especially not for the indeterminate futuer
15:32:42 <brent> we are absolutely not qualified to vet all possible VC securing mechanisms
15:33:10 <ivan> present+ oliver
15:33:12 <oliver> oliver has joined #vcwg
15:33:14 <oliver> present+
15:33:14 <Orie> in my experience we are *not* careful enough to confuse "abstract proof" with "data integrity proof"
15:33:24 <Orie> and this issue is a result of that
15:33:33 <GregB> manu: on same path until we had to remove the word proof, concern that we need to replace every use of the word proof...
15:33:36 <seabass> q+ to reply about qualifications (if this is still on the agenda)
15:33:43 <TallTed> s/careful enough to confuse/careful enough to not confuse/
15:33:54 <dlongley> Orie: i'm actually not sure if the outcome of this discussion changes anything practical.
15:33:54 <TallTed> q+
15:33:56 <brent> we were on the right path until the suggestion was made that the VCWG needs to bless every possible securing mechanism.
15:34:00 <GregB> manu: we have been very careful on the use of the language and the word "proof"
15:34:03 <DavidC> DavidC has joined #vcwg
15:34:05 <ivan> present+ davidc
15:34:07 <JoeAndrieu> q+ to suggest PRs from Orie where he can point out exactly where "proof" is problematic
15:34:10 <kristina> ack manu
15:34:12 <DavidC> present+
15:34:20 <Orie> dlongley I am in the same boat... that is why its so concerning.
15:34:27 <selfissued> +1
15:34:28 <kristina> ack seabass
15:34:28 <Zakim> seabass, you wanted to reply about qualifications (if this is still on the agenda)
15:34:35 <dlongley> Orie: I'm actually *not* concerned for that reason :)
15:35:14 <Orie> It's ok for me to be "
15:35:23 <GregB> sebass: agree with Manu's direction. This WG *is* qualified to say something about cryptography...
15:35:30 <Orie> "in the rough" on the proof langauge...
15:35:33 <manu> q+ to move on :)
15:35:34 <kristina> we have a section titled "Proofs (signature)" so I think we can safely add clarification that "VC is cryptographically verifiable/secured" without affecting proof terms
15:35:37 <kristina> ack TallTed
15:36:18 <GregB> TallTed: Sebastian this WG has an end date. Cannot make any guarantees on on going crypto...
15:36:20 <kristina> this sentence is why no need to change anything 'proof' while adding 'cryptographically verifiable': "The cryptographic mechanism used to prove that the information in a verifiable credential or verifiable presentation was not tampered with is called a proof. "
15:36:38 <Orie> most of my comments regarding use of the "word proof" are based on the numerous conversations tallted and I have had on many issues regarding this.
15:36:39 <GregB> TallTed: on lockable/locked door.
15:36:47 <manu> Yes, to some variation of what Kristina said above ^
15:36:55 <dmitriz> @TallTed - in your analogy, the question is "is it the door with a lock?" and YES, it still is, even if key is hanging outside
15:36:59 <manu> ... and I feel like we already say that in the spec.
15:37:05 <GregB> TallTed: key left hanging on the door...
15:37:11 <brent> I'm now officially lost on the locked door analogies
15:37:23 <kristina> q?
15:37:29 <Orie> FWIW I agree there is a way to make it clear when we are being abstract, and when we are being concrete... my only concern is that when we are concrete we are consistent in both RDF and english
15:37:32 <kristina> ack JoeAndrieu
15:37:32 <Zakim> JoeAndrieu, you wanted to suggest PRs from Orie where he can point out exactly where "proof" is problematic
15:38:09 <GregB> JoeAndrieus: yes, to Manu's direction. Let's get to specifics... To Ted the door is securable
15:38:13 <kristina> ack manu
15:38:13 <Zakim> manu, you wanted to move on :)
15:38:25 <manu> subtopic: https://github.com/w3c/vc-data-model/pull/1212
15:38:26 <TallTed> YES, securABLE, not necessarily securED!
15:38:40 <Orie> This is the primary place where we are being messy: https://w3c.github.io/vc-data-model/#securing-verifiable-credentials
15:39:08 <Orie> q+
15:39:20 <dmitriz> @Orie - interesting. any particular place in that section? Looking through it, it seems pretty clear..
15:39:21 <GregB> manu: PR 1212 examples of securing mechanisms in spec. Point to specifications or directory? Need PR about media types?
15:39:27 <kristina> q?
15:39:30 <kristina> ack Orie
15:39:53 <JoeAndrieu> q+ to say that SHOULD use something from the Dir is problematic
15:40:36 <GregB> orie: VCs with some securing mechanims, with DI proofs; two specs; or media types; This or that language in DM spec
15:40:55 <manu> q+ to note that's not what we do (only refer to two things)
15:41:02 <GregB> orie: merge media types, refer to them consistently
15:41:04 <kristina> ack JoeAndrieu
15:41:04 <Zakim> JoeAndrieu, you wanted to say that SHOULD use something from the Dir is problematic
15:41:27 <Orie> +1 on should to MAY
15:41:33 <GregB> JoeAndrieu: this establishes related specs into a priveleged posistion...
15:41:35 <manu> +1 on SHOULD to MAY conversion
15:41:40 <kristina> ack manu
15:41:40 <Zakim> manu, you wanted to note that's not what we do (only refer to two things)
15:41:48 <ivan> +1 to MAY
15:42:42 <GregB> manu: securing mechanisms we have vetted here and those not. Anyone can add to specs dir. No review...
15:42:49 <JoeAndrieu> q+ to say it won't suggest that. it's a directory not a registry
15:43:05 <selfissued> I want XML DSIG
15:43:09 <GregB> manu: very dangerous thing; any mechanism...
15:43:21 <seabass> q+
15:43:30 <kristina> ack JoeAndrieu
15:43:30 <Zakim> JoeAndrieu, you wanted to say it won't suggest that. it's a directory not a registry
15:43:55 <Orie> +1 JoeAndrieu
15:44:14 <kristina> ack seabass
15:44:21 <GregB> JoeAndrieu: I think anything does go; people can come up with new crypto; a registry is okay; our mechanisms are published as recs.
15:44:49 <JoeAndrieu> s/a registry is okay/a directory is okay/
15:44:50 <GregB> sebass: be careful, don't devalue our (WG) opinion
15:45:07 <manu> q+ to note that we don't say what has and has not been vetted in the registry.
15:45:12 <GregB> kristina: safely change to MAY...
15:45:14 <kristina> ack manu
15:45:14 <Zakim> manu, you wanted to note that we don't say what has and has not been vetted in the registry.
15:45:40 <Orie> q+
15:45:45 <kristina> ack Orie
15:45:53 <GregB> manu: we don't say what has/hasn't been vetted in registry? The VC DM doesn't say what has been vetted.
15:46:21 <GregB> manu: how should we refer to securing mechanisms we have been working on?
15:46:34 <Orie> I suggested a concrete change here: https://github.com/w3c/vc-data-model/pull/1212/files#r1279836059
15:46:46 <GregB> manu: what sections/where to put?
15:46:51 <kristina> ack Orie
15:47:56 <GregB> orie: if media types is merge is will be ovious;
15:48:08 <manu> https://github.com/w3c/vc-specs-dir/pull/14
15:48:26 <Orie> +1 manu
15:48:36 <GregB> manu: blocking on Kristina PR 14; create media type in specs dir; then merge
15:48:38 <kristina> ack JoeAndrieu
15:48:47 <Orie> I can edit "register to list"
15:48:54 <decentralgabe> directister
15:49:02 <GregB> JoeAndrieu: avoid that directory is a registry
15:49:08 <manu> subtopic: https://github.com/w3c/vc-data-model/pull/1215
15:49:16 <manu> https://github.com/w3c/vc-data-model/pull/1218
15:49:24 <GregB> manu: PR 1215 1218. approvals.
15:49:30 <manu> subtopic: https://github.com/w3c/vc-data-model/pull/1219
15:49:50 <ivan> q+
15:49:52 <GregB> manu: JWT stuff from Orie...
15:50:04 <oliver> q+
15:50:11 <kristina> ack ivan
15:50:30 <Orie> q+
15:50:30 <manu> q+ on URls to use
15:50:33 <TallTed> Sorry, I'm slow, I have to re-review most recent changes in https://github.com/w3c/vc-specs-dir/pull/14
15:50:37 <kristina> ack oliver
15:50:58 <GregB> oliver: how to keep spec in sync with IANA registry
15:51:01 <JoeAndrieu> q+ if ok, I'd like to suggest an improvement related to that previous issue about specs-dir
15:51:08 <kristina> q?
15:51:10 <JoeAndrieu> q+ to if ok, I'd like to suggest an improvement related to that previous issue about specs-dir
15:51:12 <kristina> ack Orie
15:51:16 <GregB> kristina: Orie only adding already reged
15:51:38 <manu> q-
15:51:46 <kristina> s/reged/registered
15:52:00 <manu> manu has joined #vcwg
15:52:04 <kristina> q?
15:52:28 <oliver> q+
15:52:30 <GregB> orie: has spoken with IANA folks; registries being updated, no timeline
15:52:46 <oliver> q-
15:52:47 <manu> yes, what Orie said :)
15:52:49 <kristina> ack JoeAndrieu
15:52:49 <Zakim> JoeAndrieu, you wanted to if ok, I'd like to suggest an improvement related to that previous issue about specs-dir
15:52:58 <oliver> q+
15:53:04 <kristina> ack oliver
15:53:12 <JoeAndrieu> q+ to if ok, I'd like to suggest an improvement related to that previous issue about specs-dir
15:53:21 <Orie> Oliver, the same thing that happens today... you add a second context.
15:53:24 <kristina> q+
15:53:26 <ivan> q+
15:53:28 <manu> correct ^
15:53:33 <GregB> oliver: concern was publish, then new "claims" get registered; can we update context
15:53:36 <JoeAndrieu> q later
15:53:43 <JoeAndrieu> q?
15:54:04 <kristina> ack kristina
15:54:11 <ivan> q-
15:54:12 <GregB> kristina: not sure what claims your concerned about...
15:54:17 <brent> it is a problem for a future working group
15:54:22 <JoeAndrieu> https://github.com/w3c/vc-specs-dir/issues/27
15:54:25 <kristina> ack JoeAndrieu
15:54:25 <Zakim> JoeAndrieu, you wanted to if ok, I'd like to suggest an improvement related to that previous issue about specs-dir
15:54:37 <kristina> q?
15:55:14 <GregB> manu: let's end here
15:55:22 <identitywoman> winning!
15:55:44 <Orie> q+
15:56:12 <kristina> ack Orie
15:56:50 <kristina> is:issue is:open -label:before-CR -label:"pending close" sort:updated-asc
15:57:15 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #vcwg
15:57:19 <kristina> https://github.com/w3c/vc-data-model/issues?q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+-label%3Abefore-CR+-label%3A%22pending+close%22+sort%3Aupdated-asc
15:57:34 <GregB> kristina: thanks all, see you next week
15:57:46 <ivan> rrsagent, draft minutes
15:57:47 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/08/09-vcwg-minutes.html ivan
15:57:59 <ivan> zakim, end meeting
15:57:59 <Zakim> As of this point the attendees have been ivan, brent, TallTed, hsano, GregB, benjamin, orie, seabass, pl-ASU, kristina, dlongley, andres, bigbluehat, dmitriz, PaulD, selfissued,
15:58:02 <Zakim> ... manu, cabernet, griffin, JoeAndrieu, gabe, identitywoman, oliver, davidc
15:58:02 <Zakim> RRSAgent, please draft minutes
15:58:03 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/08/09-vcwg-minutes.html Zakim
15:58:09 <Zakim> I am happy to have been of service, ivan; please remember to excuse RRSAgent.  Goodbye
15:58:09 <ivan> rsagent, bye
15:58:09 <Zakim> Zakim has left #vcwg
18:33:56 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #vcwg
18:36:59 <gkellogg_> gkellogg_ has joined #vcwg
18:38:17 <tzviya> tzviya has joined #vcwg
18:39:00 <gkellog__> gkellog__ has joined #vcwg
18:40:50 <gkello___> gkello___ has joined #vcwg
18:41:57 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #vcwg
18:46:23 <gkellogg_> gkellogg_ has joined #vcwg
18:57:12 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #vcwg
19:01:36 <gkellogg_> gkellogg_ has joined #vcwg
19:03:03 <gkellog__> gkellog__ has joined #vcwg
19:08:43 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #vcwg
19:20:18 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #vcwg
21:10:39 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #vcwg
21:10:59 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #vcwg
21:35:07 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #vcwg
21:45:18 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #vcwg
21:45:42 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #vcwg
21:58:35 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #vcwg
23:37:02 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #vcwg
23:41:55 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #vcwg
23:57:55 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #vcwg