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

Re: Comments on draft charter [Was: Agenda: Verifiable Claims Teleconference - Tuesday, March 8th 2016]

From: Stone, Matt <matt.stone@pearson.com>
Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2016 11:42:11 -0700
Message-ID: <CA+w1=RR1Ptg8F6MEhiyXvCdSYC_4uquJw=7Pg1MD1pYycrZgXg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org>
Cc: Eric Korb <eric.korb@accreditrust.com>, Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>, Credentials Community Group <public-credentials@w3.org>
i'm certainly in favor of reducing fraud and improving operational
efficiency so I'm not proposing we eliminate those goals outright.  I am a
big advocate of having a clear relationship chain from problem to
deliverables through goals.  If all 3 aren't clearly and explicitly
related, the charter, and by extension, our work, won't get the support we
want.  we'll hear too much noise about that sound like "i don't get it".

The goals have to include the "so what?" factor.  as a pattern I've had
success by expressing a goal in this pattern:  We will achieve X by doing
Y.  In this pattern X is related to one or more problems and Y is related
to one or more deliverables. -- Ian's last example is right on target for
this approach, it's great.

Can we cast the other content that way?


Matt Stone

On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 11:29 AM, Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org> wrote:

> > On Mar 11, 2016, at 12:19 PM, Stone, Matt <matt.stone@pearson.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > +1 for casting goals with a positive outcome -- "improve" is almost
> always better than "reduce" but...
> >
> > these are good generalized goals, but they don't serve the problem
> statements. - fraud and identity theft is not in our problem statement, why
> would we have a goal about it?  The goals we're pursuing need to address
> the problems we're identifying.
> >
> > can we make a goal like
> > - set the foundation for uniform access and share-ability of claims by
> providing a standards driven, extensible data model for claim data
> Hi Matt,
> Personally, I find Manu’s goals give me an immediate sense of relevance to
> things I understand without knowing anything about credentials: usability,
> fraud, cost, etc.
> Your statement does not give me —the credentials novice— the same clarity.
> The statement may be very relevant and compelling for someone who is
> already familiar
> with the group’s vision.
> I do agree with your point, however, about improving the link between the
> problem statements and the goals.
> For example, something like this:
>  * Today people may be reluctant to conduct certain types of transactions
> (e.g., high value payments) on the Web because of concerns of fraud and
> liability.
>  * While companies may develop 1-off solutions to these issues, the very
> nature of the problem is communication, and therefore proprietary approaches
>     limit scalability and increase costs.
>  * One goal of this group is to reduce fraud due to identity theft by by
> establishing a standard way to cryptographically verify 3rd party claims.
> Ian
> >
> > is there a way assert some kind of evidence of success of the goals we
> express?
> >
> > section 3.2: obviously in "Security is obviously critical"​ sounds
> condescending
> --
> Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org>      http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs
> Tel:                       +1 718 260 9447
Received on Friday, 11 March 2016 18:42:38 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 11 March 2016 18:42:38 UTC