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

Re: Self-sovereign identity and payments (was Re: WebCrypto - In "progress" since 2012)

From: Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2016 16:46:30 +0200
Message-ID: <CAKaEYhJiHDcdLSHCZemUNzdPh5NzeT10tZ5hqUB13AiNsmGsuQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
Cc: W3C Credentials Community Group <public-credentials@w3.org>, Web Payments CG <public-webpayments@w3.org>
On 30 April 2016 at 16:43, Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com> wrote:

>
>
> On 30 April 2016 at 15:39, Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com> wrote:
>
>> On 04/30/2016 09:17 AM, Timothy Holborn wrote:
>> > how can we universally agree on the problem about 'human' as to
>> > supports the spirits of law, humility, shared values, human rights
>> > and all such things as to bring us together in a manner that says we
>> >  are flesh not tools.
>>
>> Christopher Allen (co-editor of TLS and organizer for the Rebooting Web
>> of Trust Workshops) has written a thought provoking piece on
>> self-sovereign identity:
>>
>>
>> http://www.lifewithalacrity.com/2016/04/the-path-to-self-soverereign-identity.html
>>
>> ... which got a fair bit of focus at the Internet Identity Workshop last
>> week.
>>
>> He wrote it also in preparation for the United Nations ID2020 event:
>>
>> http://id2020summit.org/
>>
>> and the second Rebooting Web of Trust workshop:
>>
>> http://www.weboftrust.info/
>>
>> While I don't think we'll ever universally agree on the items you list
>> above before trying to solve a subset of them, all of the initiatives
>> listed above are working toward some of the things that you want to see,
>> Tim.
>>
>
> It was really nice to see the W3C verifiable claims work mentioned
>
> Essentially every proposal to date ive seen from this group is what I
> would call a "non additive" solution.  What I mean by that is, that it
> offers a number of possibilities of what is a valid identity.  ie identity
> is defined from a white list of options (A | B | C) and all else is
> excluded.  This does not scale to the web.  And I Think the piece is partly
> a post mortem about that experience.
>
> I think the work at the W3C is the first work that is towards a "additive"
> or "open" approach.  It means *any* identity system can work, and here is
> how to support A | B | C -- add more to the list.
>

> AND is better than OR.  Hopefully that concept of exclusivity, rather than
> exclusivity, can become the basis of identity and payments work and the
> filter through to the specs.
>

that should read: "inclusivity" is better than "exclusivity" :)


>
>
>>
>> -- manu
>>
>> PS: While the Web Payments CG is cc'd on this email, I suggest we drop
>> that mailing list if this goes down an "identity" path.
>>
>
> Only if it goes off topic -- we should not censor topics preemtively.
>
> I think a payments system needs to be layered on top of a robust identity
> solution, and we dont have that today.  Identity is fundamental to payments
> (even more fundamental than security) simply because you need to be 100%
> sure where you are sending something to avoid money getting lost.
>
>
>>
>> --
>> Manu Sporny (skype: msporny, twitter: manusporny, G+: +Manu Sporny)
>> Founder/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc.
>> JSON-LD Best Practice: Context Caching
>> https://manu.sporny.org/2016/json-ld-context-caching/
>>
>>
>
Received on Saturday, 30 April 2016 14:47:00 UTC

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