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

Re: Web Payments IG approves Verifiable Claims to proceed to W3C Management

From: Marta Piekarska <marta@blockstream.io>
Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2016 04:20:46 -0700
Cc: Marta <marta@blockstream.com>, Credentials Community Group <public-credentials@w3.org>, Web Payments IG <public-webpayments-ig@w3.org>, Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
Message-Id: <CFB5E821-2003-447A-AA2E-1D45DE278835@blockstream.com>
To: Chaals McCathie Nevile <chaals@yandex-team.ru>
Absolutely agree!

Verifiable claims have various applications and each of them will require a slightly different details. But STANDARDS are to solve problems in GENERAL. If we continue dividing the ecosystem into more and more task forces and groups we will effectively get the opposite effect.

Have a great day.
m

> On Jul 14, 2016, at 3:59 AM, Chaals McCathie Nevile <chaals@yandex-team.ru> wrote:
> 
> On Mon, 04 Jul 2016 19:31:13 +0200, Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com> wrote:
> 
>> We know of the following modification requests to the charter:
>> 
>> 1. Constrain the charter to Education only.
> 
> This strikes me as a very bad idea.
> 
> It makes sense to suggest that the charter *focus* on Educational Industry needs, and requires that the solution is relevant there. But any approach to standards that suggests different industries *should* have different standards to solve the same problem is short-sighted and IMHO desctructive.
> 
> It may well turn out that different approaches are the appropriate answer to the needs of say the Education and the Credit rating industries. But to assert that a priori seems foolish.
> 
>> 2. Demonstrate that the charter is not competitive to JSON Object
>>   Signing and Encryption Web Tokens (JOSE JWT).
> 
> Why is this important?
> 
>> 3. Remove or greatly narrow the overarching problem statement
>>   about self-sovereign ecosystem and goals from the charter.
>> 
>> The anticipated next steps for the Verifiable Claims Task Force and
>> Credentials Community Group are:
>> 
>> 1. Determine if we want to constrain the charter to Education only.
> 
> At this stage I am opposed to such a constraint. To the extent that I would strongly consider a formal AC objection to it in a charter review.
> 
> cheers
> 
> Chaals
> 
>> 2. Update the Data Model and Representations specification to clearly
>>   demonstrate that this technology is not competitive to JOSE/JWT.
>> 3. Determine if we want to modify the problem statement and
>>   charter goals.
>> 4. Plan our first face-to-face meeting, possibly at W3C TPAC in
>>   Lisbon at the end of September.
>> 
>> W3C Staff are currently drafting changes that they think would result in
>> consensus. Once we have those suggestions in hand, and once we've talked
>> with the dissenting organizations, we'll be able to have a better idea
>> about timeline.
>> 
>> The next Verifiable Claims telecon will be Tuesday, July 12th at 11am
>> ET. Dial in details can be found here:
>> 
>> https://w3c.github.io/vctf/#telecons
>> 
>> -- manu
>> 
> 
> 
> --
> Charles McCathie Nevile - web standards - CTO Office, Yandex
> chaals@yandex-team.ru - - - Find more at http://yandex.com
> 


Received on Thursday, 14 July 2016 11:21:23 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 11 July 2018 21:19:30 UTC