[MINUTES] W3C Credentials CG Call - 2018-01-30 12pm ET

Thanks to Joe Andrieu for scribing this week! The minutes
for this week's Credentials CG telecon are now available:

https://w3c-ccg.github.io/meetings/2018-01-30/

Full text of the discussion follows for W3C archival purposes.
Audio from the meeting is available as well (link provided below).

----------------------------------------------------------------
Credentials CG Telecon Minutes for 2018-01-30

Agenda:
  https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-credentials/2018Jan/0073.html
Topics:
  1. Introductions and Reintroductions
  2. Agenda for Today
  3. Action Items
  4. CG Process
  5. Data Minimization
  6. Education Task Force
Resolutions:
  1. Merge PR 41 into the main specification based on no 
    objections, we have achieved consensus on this PR.
Action Items:
  1. Ryan Grant to submit Pull Request to update bad links.
  2. Mike Lodder to invite Jan Camenisch to crypto Tuesday
  3. CCG to create VC examples repo.
Organizer:
  Joe Andrieu and Christopher Allen and Kim Hamilton Duffy
Scribe:
  Joe Andrieu
Present:
  Moses Ma, Lionel Wolberger, Joe Andrieu, Bob Dolan, Kim Hamilton 
  Duffy, Manu Sporny, Ryan Grant, Mike Lodder, Ted Thibodeau, 
  Christopher Allen, Nate Otto, David Chadwick, Kerri Lemoie, 
  Bohdan Andriyiv, Stuart Sutton, Jarlath O'Carroll, Serge Ravet, 
  David I. Lehn, Benjamin Young
Audio:
  https://w3c-ccg.github.io/meetings/2018-01-30/audio.ogg

Moses Ma: I'm leaving in 30 minutes
Lionel Wolberger: Conference line keeps disconnecting
Joe Andrieu is scribing.

Topic: Introductions and Reintroductions

Bob Dolan:  Background in cognitive neuroscience
  ... research scientist for years with Pearson
  ... now focused in k-12

Topic: Agenda for Today

Kim Hamilton Duffy:  Focus today on the Education task force
Manu Sporny:  May want to cover uport blog post
Manu Sporny:  If you're writing about the work of the community
  ... please share credit for the groups that have been 
  incubating these ideas
  ... IIW, RWOT, W3C, DIF
Kim Hamilton Duffy:  Next week is our first Crypto Tuesday
Kim Hamilton Duffy: https://github.com/w3c-ccg/data-minimization
  ... we'll be talking about Selective and Minimal disclosure
Kim Hamilton Duffy: Dv suites: https://w3c-dvcg.github.io/
  ... we'll also be reviewing the digital verification suites
  ... we iterate these as needed, and now it time to focus on 
  them
  ... Feb 13 we'll be discussing linked datas capabilities, aka 
  OCAP
Kim Hamilton Duffy: Linked Data cap: 
  https://github.com/WebOfTrustInfo/rebooting-the-web-of-trust-fall2017/blob/master/final-documents/lds-ocap.pdf
  ... Upcoming events
Manu Sporny: New LDOCAP spec: https://w3c-ccg.github.io/ld-ocap/
  ... Implementers standup ~Feb 19
Kim Hamilton Duffy: RWOT: https://rwot6.eventbrite.com
  ... RWOT VI Mar 6-8 in Santa Barbara
  ... that Monday a RWOT Disc Golf Tourney
  ... IIW April 3-5
Kim Hamilton Duffy: Eventbrite for IIW: 
  https://www.eventbrite.com/e/internet-identity-workshop-iiwxxvi-26-2018a-tickets-39785360083
  ... Post IIW Verifiable Claims Face-to-Face April 5,6

Topic: Action Items

Manu Sporny: DID Spec Harmonization: 
  https://github.com/w3c-ccg/did-spec/pull/41
Manu Sporny:  There is a pull request for DID spec harmonization
  ... talked about this on the DID task force call
  ... talked about this last week, no objections
  ... so unless there are objections here, we'll pull this in
Ryan Grant:  There are a couple places in the security section 
  that needs help. This isn't an objection, but there are places 
  that need fixing.
Manu Sporny:  We'll be doing further PRs
  ... so let's pull in those comments as new PR

ACTION: Ryan Grant to submit Pull Request to update bad links.

Mike Lodder:  On the queue for Drummond
  ... On the subject of DID. Great talk with Sam Smith
  ... Should be posted tomorrow
  ... Final DID spec call this week
Kim Hamilton Duffy:  Do we need a final +1?
Manu Sporny:  That's a good idea

PROPOSAL:  Merge PR 41 into the main specification based on no 
  objections, we have achieved consensus on this PR.

Joe Andrieu: +1
Kim Hamilton Duffy: +1
Manu Sporny: +1
Ted Thibodeau: +1
Christopher Allen: +1
Ryan Grant: +1

RESOLUTION: Merge PR 41 into the main specification based on no 
  objections, we have achieved consensus on this PR.

Christopher Allen: Discounts with paper!
Joe Andrieu:  Can I post RWOT details to VCWG? [scribe assist by 
  Kim Hamilton Duffy]
Manu Sporny:  Yes [scribe assist by Kim Hamilton Duffy]
Joe Andrieu:  I'll get something out to both email lists
Manu Sporny:  Question for Joe
Nate Otto: I'm sure my paper will come in less than a week before 
  the event. Will purchase my ticket and travel for RWOT in the 
  next couple days.
  ... if someone is writing a paper, do we have to submit that 
  before buying?
Manu Sporny: Go to https://rwot6.eventbrite.com/
Joe Andrieu:  Not at all.
  ... You should be able to buy tickets before the paper.
Joe Andrieu:  Almost done with engagement model [scribe assist by 
  Kim Hamilton Duffy]
Kim Hamilton Duffy: ...Will be released through RWoT but we'll 
  pull it in here
David Chadwick:  Under lifecycle model item...
Joe Andrieu:  Would like to review engagement model with ccg 
  [scribe assist by Kim Hamilton Duffy]
  ... did post something 1/17.  That was responded too.
  ... last week we discussed PRs for the spec
  ... so that's my new action item
Manu Sporny:  I had problems hearing you...
  ... I did see that email
  ... PRs are a good way to engage
  ... And Manu will work with you to incorporate your feedback
  ... Last week's meeting it got documented as feedback on DID 
  spec... but its not.
  ... it's feedback for the data model document
Mike Lodder:  I also do not hear every syllable [scribe assist by 
  Lionel Wolberger]
Christopher Allen:  Continued audio problems with DavidC
David Chadwick:  I think its something with my microphone. I can 
  hear you all well

Topic: CG Process

Christopher Allen:  One of our agenda items is to define what is 
  the process we are doing with the ccg
  ... Some things are already defined by W3C
  ... but then, within our own process since our reboot last 
  summer,
  ... we want to document was new in the kinds of things we do
  ... if you have thoughts about how we should run things, let us 
  know
  ... Joe and I are working on a draft we'll make available to 
  the group

Topic: Data Minimization

Lionel Wolberger:  Data Minimization Paper
  ... there has been progress
  ... fine tuning last draft
  ... moving forward
Christopher Allen:  Next week we'll touch on the paper
  ... that's Crypto Tuesday and that will be our first topic

ACTION: Mike Lodder to invite Jan Camenisch to crypto Tuesday

Lionel Wolberger:  ... There is a CL section in the document. 
  Might be good to reach out to Jan.
  ... Also maybe we can reach out to Dan Larimer?
Kim Hamilton Duffy: Education Task Force: 
  https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1lJm2UPVQOUfHAYD50doWAwhqb97abfMgbsFZjZ8Rj-I/edit?usp=sharing
Kim Hamilton Duffy: Repo: 
  https://github.com/w3c-ccg/edu_occ_verifiable_credentials

Topic: Education Task Force

Kim Hamilton Duffy:  We're launching the Education and Life Long 
  Learning Task Force (name may change)
  ... we going to overview the work we have in mind
  ... we see the CCG as a good fit with this education work
  ... Nate Otto and Kerri Lemoie will talk about it
  ... Long been an interest in Open Badges and verifiable 
  credentials
  ... a desire for a more lightweight specification
  ... we've gotten more motivated to engage on that.
  ... we see this eventually resulting in requirements from 
  education
  ... for example, in verifiable claims, examples are things like 
  driver's license or other IDs given to you
  ... in education formal needs are important,
  ... but so are endorsements that, say, a peer gives
  ... The other thing we see as potential deliverable is a draft 
  specification
  ... for where we want to see an Open Badges Verifiable 
  Credential standard
  ...also technical prototyping
Nate Otto: We think that through this work we could outline what 
  changes might be needed to these associated specifications to 
  make sure they have a happy future together. For example, "Add 
  Linked Data Signatures as a new available signing method for Open 
  Badges"
Kim Hamilton Duffy:  Priorities include engaging the broader 
  community
  ...we want to be able to express open badges as verifiable 
  credentials
  ...we see an open badges being wrapped by verifiable 
  credential, using linked-data signatures
  ...we are trying to let Open Badges *use* the tools of the VCWG 
  and community
Nate Otto: 
  https://github.com/w3c-ccg/edu_occ_verifiable_credentials/blob/master/open_badge_assertions_as_verifiable_credentials.md 
  Whoops just noticed one tiny issue with this -- reusing the 
  "recipient_did" so intent is ambiguous. The claim should have its 
  own unique DID as id, and we would use the 
  "did:example:recipient_did" as the recipient.identity
  ...recipent owned credentials are important
  ...and LD signatures compatibility
Kerri Lemoie: http://credreg.net/
  ...next up: Credential Engine Registry
Kerri Lemoie:  Applications can use the registry for free
  ... archived by Internet Archive
  ... over 200 fields to define credentials
Nate Otto: The Credential Engine Registry is available at 
  https://credentialfinder.com/
  ...this is a proposal for further discussions
Kim Hamilton Duffy:  Features to add to Open Badges
  ... 1. amending an assertion with further evidence
  ... 2. identification of an evidence provider
Christopher Allen: (Schema link to credentials finder: 
  http://credreg.net/ctdl/terms)
  ... also the idea of credentials that aren't valid until 
  counter-signed
  ... this is vital for GDPR
Kerri Lemoie:  The counter sign ability is yet another level of 
  verifiability
  ... sometimes credentials are issued without the subject's 
  knowledge or with info they didn't intend to publicize
Kim Hamilton Duffy:  This brings up issues of different parties 
  at different phases is the credential lifecycle
Kerri Lemoie:  Ongoing conversation, issue that the creator of 
  the badge is presumed to be the issuer
  ... his has complications, but simplifies things in others
Mike Lodder: Is there a use case for issuing a credential without 
  the subject's knowledge?
Nate Otto: Both the BadgeClass and the Assertion may have an 
  "issuer" property. Currently in Open Badges 2.0 only the 
  BadgeClass identifies its "issuer", and the Assertion's creator 
  is assumed to be the same as the BadgeClass's.
  ... we've discussed different technical issues about types and 
  whether there is a finite list
  ... Which raises questions of what verifiability means
Nate Otto: We've outlined some of the use cases for allowing 
  Assertion to have an "issuer" that is different on the openbadges 
  specification here: 
  https://github.com/IMSGlobal/openbadges-specification/issues/75
Kim Hamilton Duffy:  So there are a range of topics the task 
  force would address
  ... and we'd live to have a good place to continue this 
  conversation and document what we're doing and going through a 
  consensus process to understand use cases and requirements
  ... and feed into different specs that might be implemented
Bohdan Andriyiv:  I wanted to raise a question
  ... why do we want to wrap open badges into verifiable 
  credentails? I have a propsal...
  ... why not have Open Badges *be* a verifiable credential
  ... maybe that's a simpler way. using optional properties.
  ... I'll post the idea in the open badges group
Bohdan Andriyiv: 
  https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/openbadges/MJJ52U5jTwA
Kim Hamilton Duffy:  Great. let's get that into the conversation.
  ... I look forwrd to reviewing your approach
Kerri Lemoie: +1 To further discussions on drabiv's thinking
Manu Sporny:  This is all great.
  ... fantastic to discuss how to make all these technologies 
  work together
  ... super excited about possibilities for alignment with Open 
  Badges
  ... bringing in from VCWG
Nate Otto: I suspect that Bohdan (drabiv) and we are proposing 
  very similar modifications to Open Badges to allow the expression 
  of "entity earned a <defined credential>" using the Verifiable 
  Credentials syntax.
Manu Sporny:  Lots of folks who want to create VCs, but there is 
  little guidance about how to do that
  ... developers want examples
  ... so maybe the community needs to start creating an example 
  catalog
Kim Hamilton Duffy: +1
  ...is there anyone else in the community that wants to help 
  with that?
Christopher Allen: +1
Mike Lodder: I'm interested
  ... we need this
Mike Lodder: +1
  ... here's the registry, here's where you can see how to do it
Kerri Lemoie: +1 To examples and assistance in crafting them. 
  Great way to learn.
  ... Seeing some +1s
  ... maybe this is an additional discussion
Kim Hamilton Duffy:  Absolutely. that's one of the biggest areas 
  we (the educational task force) are working on
Mike Lodder: I can't speak for the Sovrin community as a whole 
  but I believe they will want this
  ... examples of how the current specs would be used for 
  educational use cases
Christopher Allen:  An example repo with
  ... submitted for review, reviewed,
  ... with a bunch of JSON-LD examples
  ... we could accumulate examples to review
  ... then go through them collectively and unwind problems and 
  improve them as examples
  ... also, I'd be interested from an education world, 
  counter-signed claims
  ...I've long desired that for RWOT use cases, GDPR, and other 
  cases.
  ... I'd like to get the requirements for that more clear.
  ... I understand *my* reason and GDPR reasons, and I'd like to 
  understand the education uses of that
Mike Lodder: This is this why Evernym uses CL signatures
Kerri Lemoie: +1 ChristoperA
Kim Hamilton Duffy:  There is a section in VC data model...
Mike Lodder: They involve both the issuer and the subject to 
  jointly sign a claim
  ... in the case of educational claims we need to be more 
  explicit about the privacy trade-offs we're making
Kim Hamilton Duffy:  Any specific thoughts from education 
  community?
Nate Otto: Welcome Stuart to today's call!
Stuart Sutton:  This is Stuart Sutton from the credential engine
Jarlath O'Carroll: +1
  ... we are highly supportive of the work of this group.
  ... happy to contribute
Serge Ravet: Happy to contribute too :-)
Nate Otto: Stuart, could you possibly make it to Santa Barbara 
  for https://rwot6.eventbrite.com in March?
Christopher Allen:  I have a request...
  ... I'd love to see from the educational task force, some 
  peer-to-peer use cases
  ... e.g., "I've seen lots of Joe's javascript. It's high 
  quality"
Kerri Lemoie: +1 To including peer-to-peer in use cases
Nate Otto: Welcome Szerge (Serge Ravet) to the call!
Nate Otto: We Open Badges and CredReg folks have brought in some 
  newcomers to today's CCG call.
Kim Hamilton Duffy:  The work Szerge has been doing with Nate is 
  pulling in a lot of interesting European context
Serge Ravet:  I'm developing the [x] alliance
  ... working on forms of recognition
Serge Ravet: Open recognition alliance
Manu Sporny: Awesome, welcome to the group Szerge!
Kerri Lemoie: Serge is from the Open Recognition Alliance 
  http://openrecognition.org

ACTION: CCG to create VC examples repo.

Kerri Lemoie: Thank you!!
Kim Hamilton Duffy:  That's a wrap. Thanks everyone.

Received on Tuesday, 30 January 2018 18:40:01 UTC