W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-credentials@w3.org > April 2016

Re: Update on Web Payments Working Group [The Web Browser API Incubation Anti-Pattern]

From: Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 4 Apr 2016 22:23:17 +0200
Message-ID: <CAKaEYhJ-53N58B7QW5A8V6MrPC-AfhoGURFwVav0mONZyv0s3A@mail.gmail.com>
To: Christopher Allen <ChristopherA@blockstream.com>
Cc: Steven Rowat <steven_rowat@sunshine.net>, Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>, Web Payments <public-webpayments@w3.org>, Credentials CG <public-credentials@w3.org>
On 4 April 2016 at 22:02, Christopher Allen <ChristopherA@blockstream.com>
wrote:

> On Mon, Apr 4, 2016 at 10:54 AM, Steven Rowat <steven_rowat@sunshine.net>
>  wrote:
>
>>   C. The real question is: can Credentials be solved in an open-standard
>> way, thereby creating a playing field on which an open Web Payments
>> standard can flourish?
>
>
> I have not introduced myself yet, as my firm's membership (Blockstream)
> has been approved for W3C but has not been activated pending paperwork.
>

Welcome!  Anyone is welcome to participate in community groups.  Being a
paid member will also give you access to working groups.  Ive been excited
by blockstream work for some time, and am working on payment channels too.


>
> However, I want to be clear that the interest from my firm, and in general
> from the blockchain and bitcoin community that we represent, is around
> verified credentials that supports decentralized identity, private
> channels, and selective disclosure/blinding/non-correlation of identifiers
> and attributes. This is the main reason why we are joining W3C.
>

This is a great use case, and one that is well aligned with web standard
IMHO.  I am also personally working on these use cases, and feel that W3C
standards represent an unparalleled solution.


>
> We are planning to make substantial contributions of open source code and
> cryptographic develop effort in these areas over the next year (which is
> part of why I'm involved with http://ID2020Summit.org at the UN) and
> desire this to be part of an open process.
>

Awesome!


> But if W3C is not the answer for this, we'll move our efforts elsewhere.
>

The W3C isnt a magic bullet.  It produces web based specifications,
normally or a high quality in terms of extensibility and interop.  The
specs can sometimes be hard to read and over a number of documents.  And
some use cases require putting pieces together like lego, but I think the
foundation is largely sound.  Teasing out the right answers from various
specs and putting them together into a technical solution takes a bit of
skill, I think, but also is a lot of fun.

Every company has to make their bets, but Im not sure what alternatives
you'd look at.  There's many opportunities to make bad bets in this area.
Do you have any particular concerns?

Great to have you participating, I'd love over time to try and test
interoperability (especially if you've selected javascript for a language).


>
> -- Christopher Allen
>
>
Received on Monday, 4 April 2016 20:23:46 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 11 July 2018 21:19:28 UTC