00:10:17 Manu Sporny (Digital Bazaar): Minutes will be taken here: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1jsMOECFiLU8SHwOo4hP1HRKS_oFJjuyq39uTorj8GsI/edit# 00:13:33 Manu Sporny (Digital Bazaar): https://docs.google.com/document/d/1jsMOECFiLU8SHwOo4hP1HRKS_oFJjuyq39uTorj8GsI/edit# 00:14:15 Manu Sporny (Digital Bazaar): https://docs.google.com/document/d/1jsMOECFiLU8SHwOo4hP1HRKS_oFJjuyq39uTorj8GsI/edit# 00:17:20 rhiaro: scribing is fun! it's okay if it's your first time! 00:19:07 Manu Sporny (Digital Bazaar): https://docs.google.com/document/d/1jsMOECFiLU8SHwOo4hP1HRKS_oFJjuyq39uTorj8GsI/edit# 00:19:24 rhiaro: It's also nice for people to fix scribe typos in realtime if you'd like 00:20:28 justinwb: google doc link? 00:20:41 orie: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1jsMOECFiLU8SHwOo4hP1HRKS_oFJjuyq39uTorj8GsI/edit# 00:20:54 Rouven Heck: q+ 00:23:34 Samuel Smith: Link to the chat channel? 00:23:49 Brent Zundel: this is the chat channel 00:24:29 Brent Zundel: Notes and scribing are here: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1jsMOECFiLU8SHwOo4hP1HRKS_oFJjuyq39uTorj8GsI/edit# 00:24:58 Christopher Allen: q+ to speak to CCG perspective 00:25:07 Manu Sporny (Digital Bazaar): https://docs.google.com/document/d/1jsMOECFiLU8SHwOo4hP1HRKS_oFJjuyq39uTorj8GsI/edit# 00:27:46 Christopher Allen: (q- if Joe wants to speak first) 00:28:02 Adrian Gropper: q+ 00:28:06 Joe: (go ahead, Chris) 00:28:13 Manu Sporny (Digital Bazaar): /me notes Christopher, Adrian on the queue. 00:31:57 Daniel Buchner: q+ 00:32:11 Manu Sporny (Digital Bazaar): q+ to suggest a concrete way to work together. 00:32:21 Daniel Buchner: There is no difference in IPR, so posing that there isn't a valid reason 00:32:31 Daniel Buchner: is isn't* 00:32:42 Drummond Reed’s iPhone: q+ 00:32:45 Manu Sporny (Digital Bazaar): People are asserting that there is, so we have to respond to it. 00:32:52 Manu Sporny (Digital Bazaar): (IPR issues) 00:33:11 Daniel Buchner: We just published a fully spec that has been ratified here: https://identity.foundation/specs/did-configuration/ 00:33:20 Daniel Buchner: Solid has not, IPFS isn't a datastore 00:33:40 Daniel Buchner: This work started in 2012 at Mozilla 00:34:15 Rouven Heck: It would be great to learn more about the concerns in IPR; otherwise I sugggest we stop using the argument here 00:35:00 Rouven Heck: agree with Daniel - IPFS is something very different. Which highlights the scope understanding... 00:35:08 Daniel Buchner: Yep, stop using a non sequitur boogeyman that doesn't exist 00:35:58 Dan Burnett: hard to understand Daniel Buchner, audio is muffled 00:37:51 Dave Longley: (+1 to concrete proposals to move forward) 00:39:07 Daniel Buchner: It should be noted that DIF is not unproven, given JDF has been used as a backbone for several JDF orgs for over a decade 00:40:42 jonnycrunch: + IEEE 00:42:15 Adrian Gropper: IEEE is not open as compared to W3C or IETF 00:43:14 Rouven Heck: q+ 00:44:27 jonnycrunch: q+ 00:45:12 justinwb: q+ 00:45:40 Dave Longley: what does "host the reference implementations mean" ... does it mean "host the test suites"? 00:46:32 Daniel Buchner: Dave: host OSS code, harnesses, and other code items 00:47:15 Daniel Buchner: One ref implementation may be an OSS JS version of whatever this datastore protocol server primitive is 00:47:25 Dave Longley: usually you need at least 2 interoperable independent implementations for standards -- which is why that sounds a little odd to me. 00:47:54 Orie (Transmute): Like this: https://github.com/WebAssembly/spec 00:47:59 Dave Longley: /me queue is: jonnycrunch, justinwb 00:48:11 Daniel Buchner: Dave: you could host N number of implementations 00:48:16 Daniel Buchner: it's not about just one 00:48:22 Dave Longley: (hard to call them independent that way) 00:48:36 Michael Benaudis - Internet Identity Card: +1 to Manu. From the Internet Identity Card’s point of view we agree that it should be a joint effort. 00:49:05 Daniel Buchner: I would disagree that just because two pieces of codes are in repos under the same URL, they are somehow the same 00:49:20 Daniel Buchner: Could be very different groups executing on the same spec 00:49:23 Orie (Transmute): Dave: a reference implementation is meant to help independent implementations be created, the test suite ensures conformance 00:49:38 Daniel Buchner: sure, and you may want multiple reference implementations 00:50:37 Dave Longley: Daniel/Orie: I don't object to DIF hosting a reference implementation in any way, it just seems insufficient (need 2 independent ones) and that it's unnecessary to do more than host the test suite. 00:50:43 Rouven Heck: q+ 00:50:48 Orie (Transmute): Dace: agree 00:50:58 Orie (Transmute): * Dave: totally agree :) 00:51:22 Daniel Buchner: Element and ION are two implementations of a protocol being developed in DIF, and they are very independent 00:52:13 Michael Benaudis - Internet Identity Card: + 1 to Daniel Buchner. Multiple reference implementations. 00:53:04 Manu Sporny (Digital Bazaar): PROPOSAL 1: The PDS/IdH/EDV spec would be a joint work item of DIF and W3C CCG. 00:53:21 Kaliya Identity Woman: +1 00:53:21 Dave Longley: +1 00:53:22 Rouven Heck: -1 00:53:23 jonnycrunch: IEEE? 00:53:26 Michael Benaudis - Internet Identity Card: +1 00:53:27 sumita: +1 00:53:27 Dmitri Zagidulin: +1 00:53:27 Joe: +1 00:53:30 ET: +1 00:53:31 Dan Burnett: +1 00:53:32 Manu Sporny (Digital Bazaar): +1 00:53:40 Adrian Gropper: +1 00:53:43 Joachim Lohkamp (Jolocom): +1 00:53:50 Joel Hartshorn: +1 00:53:51 BalazsN: -1 00:53:54 Joe: Yes. Of course 00:53:54 Kaliya Identity Woman: I think it is so easy to join the W3C CCG to be “under” that IPR 00:53:55 Christopher Allen: +1 00:53:58 Eve Maler (ForgeRock): +1 00:54:19 jonnycrunch: -1 00:54:21 Eddie Kago: +1 00:55:03 Daniel Buchner: ~ +1 00:55:03 Orie (Transmute): +1 00:55:07 Tobias Looker: +1 00:55:10 Troy Ronda: +1 00:55:12 Stuart Freeman: +1 00:55:42 Ken Ebert: +1 00:55:49 katrynadow: +1 KD +1 Jo V +1 Jan V 00:56:24 Rouven Heck: +1 for collaboration: not sure what joint work item mean in this proposal 00:56:34 Tzviya Siegman: noooo! put the standards in one place! 00:56:51 Tzviya Siegman: look at html in whatwg and w3c for lessons from the past 00:57:04 Rouven Heck: I’m mainly for simplicity; and I don’t fully understand the logistical question on a ‘joint’ work item 00:57:14 Dmitri Zagidulin: johnnycrunch: wait but none of that is incompatible with the current proposal 00:57:45 Dmitri Zagidulin: we /are/ inviting the wider community! 00:57:46 Daniel Buchner: Tzviya: this isn't really an argument about where to do the standard - in DIF, you can then choose to take a formed draft anywhere else 00:57:57 Rouven Heck: I’m also just suggesting to continue the incumbation for now! 00:58:08 Kaliya Identity Woman: the work would be officially a “project” of the CCG and hosted at DIF on DIF infrastructure - people who contribute to this group would be asked to pass through the W3C IPR umbrella with a free ‘account’ at the W3C. 00:58:38 Brent Zundel: q+ 00:58:42 Rouven Heck: q+ 00:58:47 Daniel Buchner: so what the options essentially are, are these: 1) DIF, work it into a decent draft and take it wherever we find is best, and 2) immediately choose a final SDO right now 00:58:56 Michael Benaudis - Internet Identity Card: +1 to Manu. This is an open group and everyone can join. 00:59:18 Dave Longley: /me queue is [Brent, Rouven] 00:59:19 Manu Sporny (Digital Bazaar): PROPOSAL 1: The PDS/IdH/EDV spec will specifically be a joint work item of DIF, W3C CCG, as well as any other group or individual that would like to join the initiative. 00:59:25 Orie (Transmute): +1 00:59:28 Daniel Buchner: +1 00:59:35 Michael Benaudis - Internet Identity Card: +1 00:59:37 justinwb: +1 00:59:57 Adrian Gropper: q+ 01:00:24 Joachim Lohkamp (Jolocom): +1 01:00:25 Ganesh Annan: +1 01:00:26 Daniel Buchner: PROPOSAL: We at least like each other enough to join a single spec call 01:00:30 Daniel Buchner: ;) 01:00:33 Dave Longley: /me queue is [Brent, Rouven, Adrian] 01:00:34 Dmitri Zagidulin: lol 01:00:59 Daniel Buchner: ALTERNATIVE PROPOSAL: You don't dislike me enough that you'll suffer me on further calls 01:01:11 Rouven Heck: +1 Brent 01:01:56 Dave Longley: /me we have decided on happiness! 01:02:00 Daniel Buchner: haha 01:02:08 Rouven Heck: haha - work together yes. Name - no 01:02:09 Rouven Heck: haha 01:02:12 Manu Sporny (Digital Bazaar): PROPOSAL 2: DIF would host the PDS/IdH/EDV calls, which would be open to everyone without any fees, with full transcriptions (scribing), audio recording of calls, and publication of minutes. 01:02:14 Rouven Heck: working name for today 01:02:22 Drummond Reed’s iPhone: must drop now. thanks 01:02:24 Orie (Transmute): /me we did it chat! 01:02:24 Daniel Buchner: +1 01:02:28 Joachim Lohkamp (Jolocom): +1 01:02:29 ET: +1 01:02:29 Manu Sporny (Digital Bazaar): +1 01:02:31 Joel Hartshorn: +1 01:02:32 Orie (Transmute): =1 01:02:33 Dmitri Zagidulin: +1 01:02:34 Orie (Transmute): +1 01:02:34 Ganesh Annan: +1 01:02:36 Dave Longley: +1 01:02:38 BalazsN: +1 01:02:38 Troy Ronda: +1 01:02:39 Stuart Freeman: +1 01:02:40 Tobias Looker: +1 01:02:40 Eve Maler (ForgeRock): +1 01:02:41 justinwb: +1 01:02:42 Ken Ebert: +1 01:02:43 Joe: +1 01:02:44 Brent Zundel: +1 01:02:44 Adrian Gropper: +1 01:02:47 jonnycrunch: q+ 01:02:52 Dan Burnett: +1 01:02:53 katrynadow: +1 KD +1 Jo +1 Jan 01:03:04 Dmitri Zagidulin: . o O ( but where’s Rouven’s +1? :) ) 01:03:04 Daniel Buchner: DIF is eternal 01:03:06 Rouven Heck: haha 01:03:44 Kaliya Identity Woman: should i take over scribing? 01:03:51 Daniel Buchner: Always Be IPFSClosing! 01:03:59 Daniel Buchner: (jk, love IPFS) 01:03:59 rhiaro: Kaliya thanks! 01:04:25 Manu Sporny (Digital Bazaar): PROPOSAL 3: DIF would host the reference implementation and test suite for PDS/IdH/EDV. 01:04:33 Daniel Buchner: +1 01:04:35 Rouven Heck: +1 01:04:40 Eddie Kago: +1 01:04:41 Dave Longley: +1 01:04:43 Orie (Transmute): +1 01:04:46 Joachim Lohkamp (Jolocom): +1 01:04:48 Adrian Gropper: +1 01:04:49 Manu Sporny (Digital Bazaar): +1 01:04:49 Ganesh Annan: +1 01:04:49 Joe: +1 01:04:51 Dmitri Zagidulin: +1 01:04:52 Dan Burnett: +1 01:04:53 Troy Ronda: +1 01:04:55 BalazsN: +1 01:04:57 Tobias Looker: +1 01:05:00 Christopher Allen: +1 01:05:00 ET: +1 01:05:01 Joel Hartshorn: +1 01:05:02 Daniel Hardman: 0 01:05:04 Daniel Hardman: -1 01:05:08 Ken Ebert: +1 01:05:41 Rouven Heck: @Daniel - I guess we need to better define the cut between PDF…. and Aries 01:05:56 ET: would the verbiage “a reference implementation” potentially be better than “the implementation”? 01:06:26 rhiaro: that's how implementations in W3C are expected to be - just to prove the interop 01:06:34 Orie (Transmute): thats what a reference implementation is… see web assembly in ocaml 01:06:36 Christopher Allen: q+ 01:06:46 Dmitri Zagidulin: +1 woo ocaml! 01:06:50 Michael Benaudis - Internet Identity Card: PROPOSAL 2: +1 01:07:01 Orie (Transmute): we could use camp to force it to be unusable 01:07:05 Orie (Transmute): ocaml* 01:07:22 Dave Longley: at some point want to ask... none of these proposals affect our ability to produce a "W3C Final Community Group Report" as input to a potential W3C WG for standardization, right? ... i want to make sure a standard comes out of this, not a de facto library everyone must use. 01:08:05 Daniel Buchner: Just want to make sure that we don't block folks from creating some OSS implementation that is pretty good with well written code 01:08:19 Dave Longley: i don't see how it's possible to block people from doing that :) 01:08:38 Daniel Buchner: Well, I don't know how you make sure something is a toy vs decent code? 01:08:45 Orie (Transmute): ^ use caml 01:08:52 Dmitri Zagidulin: sick burn. 01:08:53 ET: lol 01:08:56 Manu Sporny (Digital Bazaar): PROPOSAL 3: DIF would host the reference implementation and test suite for PDS/IdH/EDV. The reference implementation is not the standard and is not the test suite and is not expected to be THE one implementation everyone should use. 01:09:06 Christopher Allen: The reference implementation should comply with the test suite 01:09:09 Daniel Buchner: +1 01:09:10 Orie (Transmute): +1 01:09:10 Dave Longley: +1 01:09:10 Joachim Lohkamp (Jolocom): +1 01:09:11 ET: +1 01:09:13 Daniel Hardman: +1 01:09:14 Adrian Gropper: +1 01:09:16 Rouven Heck: +1 01:09:17 Christopher Allen: +1 01:09:18 Joel Hartshorn: +1 01:09:21 Ken Ebert: +1 01:09:23 Manu Sporny (Digital Bazaar): +1 01:09:24 BalazsN: +1 01:09:26 Ed Goode: +1 01:09:28 Joe: +1 01:09:30 jonnycrunch: +1 01:09:32 Chad Peiper (Verif-y): +1 01:09:34 Daniel Buchner: (But there can only be one Highlander) 01:09:34 katrynadow: +1 KD +1 Jo +1 Jan 01:09:35 Ganesh Annan: +1 01:09:38 Troy Ronda: +1 01:09:45 Dan Burnett: Problem with ref implementations is that they do tend to be considered authoritative in practice, but I don't object 01:09:45 justinwb: +1 01:09:47 Dan Burnett: +1 01:10:06 rhiaro: /me really hopes DIF meeting minutes don't happen in google docs 01:10:07 Orie (Transmute): /me we did it! 01:10:18 Joe: Without IPR we can't have calls, Manu 01:10:33 Rouven Heck: Q+ 01:10:51 Dan Burnett: Joe, sure we can, we just can't propose any technical solutions :) 01:10:59 rhiaro: we can talk about the weather 01:11:07 Michael Benaudis - Internet Identity Card: PROPOSAL 3:+1 01:11:21 Joe: that's just continuing these calls. I'm talking about having calls that move the work forward. That needs consensus on IPR 01:11:35 Christopher Allen: -1 01:11:47 Orie (Transmute): -1 bring them next time 01:11:58 Manu Sporny (Digital Bazaar): q+ 01:12:03 Christopher Allen: q+ 01:15:16 Rouven Heck: q+ 01:16:32 Joe: q+ 01:16:36 Tzviya Siegman: https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Patent-Policy-20040205/ 01:16:56 Tzviya Siegman: https://www.w3.org/community/about/agreements/cla/ 01:17:09 Daniel Buchner: Could we just have them sign both? 01:17:16 Manu Sporny (Digital Bazaar): Yes, we could do that. 01:17:16 Daniel Buchner: Because DIF's is stricter 01:17:26 Manu Sporny (Digital Bazaar): q+ 01:17:33 Daniel Buchner: (stricter in a more IPR sensitive way) 01:18:00 Dan Burnett: Daniel Buchner, the issue is whether W3C would agree with that. 01:18:16 Daniel Buchner: The guy who worked on both of them said so 01:18:21 Rouven Heck: Joe - JDF was build for this, so let’s not assume it is an issue 01:18:32 Daniel Buchner: Talk to David Rudin 01:18:36 Rouven Heck: we are speculating 01:18:55 Dan Burnett: Does David Rudin work for W3C? 01:19:21 Rouven Heck: he told us, that he wrote it 01:19:50 Rouven Heck: @manu - the IPR protection with the ‘feedback agreement’ seems to be more strict 01:20:18 Michael Benaudis - Internet Identity Card: To Rouven: We are not speculating we are making history. 01:20:53 jonnycrunch: q+ 01:21:07 Daniel Buchner: Just sign them both 01:21:21 Dan Burnett: If a Microsoft attorney moved to Google and wrote a contract that he said was the same as what he wrote at Microsoft, would Microsoft agree just because he said so? 01:21:43 Rouven Heck: I’m all for speed, but we should be careful to make a decision today to have a call next week without clear consequences 01:22:14 Rouven Heck: q+ 01:22:22 Manu Sporny (Digital Bazaar): PROPOSAL 5: The IPR policy would be the "W3C W3C IPR policy", not the "DIF W3C IPR policy". The specification would have the "W3C W3C IPR policy" on it, and anyone that participates in the group MUST be a W3C CCG member and can, in addition, be a DIF member. 01:22:26 Daniel Buchner: I think that infers a level of maliciousness that isn't due, and I can stand behind what Rudin says - he's not an Old MSFT guy 01:22:44 Rouven Heck: -1 01:22:48 Manu Sporny (Digital Bazaar): +1 01:22:49 Joachim Lohkamp (Jolocom): +1 01:22:49 Joe: +1 01:22:50 Orie (Transmute): +1 01:22:51 Dave Longley: +1 01:22:52 Dan Burnett: +1 01:22:52 Tzviya Siegman: +1 01:22:55 Kaliya Identity Woman: +1 01:22:59 Eve Maler (ForgeRock): +1 01:23:07 Ganesh Annan: +1 01:23:10 Stuart Freeman: +1 01:23:11 Adrian Gropper: +1 01:23:13 Ken Ebert: +1 01:23:14 bshambaugh: +1 01:23:18 Christopher Allen: +1 01:23:18 Dan Burnett: Daniel, no malice intended - just the fact that lawyers disagree all the time :) 01:23:21 Tobias Looker: +1 01:23:22 justin: +1 01:23:39 Rouven Heck: We cannot commit to this proposal today and know the implications 01:23:41 Rouven Heck: q+ 01:23:41 Joe: q+ 01:23:46 BalazsN: -1 01:24:04 Dave Longley: /me queue [Rouven, Joe], -1 from Balazs and Rouven 01:24:28 jonnycrunch: it might be helpful to have have an educational session with the lawyers to understand the implications 01:25:04 Dave Longley: we don't move, we just keep the W3C CCG one. 01:25:16 Dave Longley: it's good enough to get to a standard. 01:25:57 Daniel Buchner: q+ what is the track record of moving something from the CCG under that IRP outside of W3C, to another SDO? 01:26:22 Daniel Buchner: Do we have assurances that we can export that work to IETF, IEEE, etc? 01:26:27 Manu Sporny (Digital Bazaar): yes we do 01:26:44 Daniel Buchner: Which specs have proven this? 01:26:57 Rouven Heck: q+ 01:26:58 Manu Sporny (Digital Bazaar): WebRTC, HTTP, etc. 01:27:23 Dave Longley: q+ 01:28:25 Daniel Buchner: Sorry for my queue interruption earlier 01:28:29 Daniel Buchner: you can take me off 01:28:34 Daniel Buchner: q- 01:29:13 Manu Sporny (Digital Bazaar): PROPOSAL 5: The IPR policy will need to be agreed to between DIF and W3C. Rouven has an action item to move that discussion forward. Meetings will not begin until this is resolved. 01:29:16 Orie (Transmute): -1 01:29:29 Rouven Heck: +1 01:29:33 rhiaro: Why are DIF unhappy with w3c IPR if it's 'essentially the same'? 01:29:33 Joe: -1 01:29:34 BalazsN: +1 01:29:36 Kaliya Identity Woman: -1 01:29:37 Dave Longley: -1 01:29:38 Daniel Buchner: +1 01:29:41 Daniel Buchner: q+ 01:29:45 Adrian Gropper: +0 01:29:47 Dan Burnett: +0 01:29:50 Manu Sporny (Digital Bazaar): +1 01:30:01 Tzviya Siegman: /me thinks we are talking in circles because most of us don't understand IP law 01:30:28 Orie (Transmute): ^ thats why we should agree to a proven system and be done with this. 01:30:28 Michael Benaudis - Internet Identity Card: +1 01:30:40 Dave Longley: We were hearing this was all the same and now it's not ... if it's the same, we should pick what everyone is already supposedly comfortable with: W3C CCG IPR policy. 01:31:12 Dan Burnett: +1 Tzviya, W3C needs to say whether DIF's policy satisfies the requirements of W3C's IPR policy 01:31:17 Adrian Gropper: I would love to understand the actual IPR issues. That speaks for legal review, I guess. 01:32:22 Manu Sporny (Digital Bazaar): q+ 01:33:20 Chad Peiper (Verif-y): +1 01:33:22 Rouven Heck: +1 Manu 01:33:34 Christopher Allen: q+ 01:33:37 Adrian Gropper: +1 Manu 01:33:42 Michael Benaudis - Internet Identity Card: +1 Manu 01:34:04 Dmitri Zagidulin: +1, srsly impressive progress. 01:34:08 Orie (Transmute): yes, good progress. I understand the complexity, and appreciate the effort from all parties 01:34:35 Daniel Buchner: I will help to get this sorted with Rouven, Manu, and others as fast as humanly possible 01:35:09 Michael Benaudis - Internet Identity Card: +1 Dmitri - impressive progress! 01:35:09 Sam Curren (TelegramSam): -1 01:35:26 Rouven Heck: @Chris - are cancelling all proposals? 01:35:32 Daniel Buchner: DIF is not also doing all the standards 01:35:47 Daniel Buchner: it's a place to draft and take a spec somewhere 01:36:17 Dan Burnett: No, Joe, we have agreement on all but the last point 01:36:20 Michael Benaudis - Internet Identity Card: +1 Orie - appreciate the effort from all parties! 01:36:33 katrynadow: I don’t understand why we’re trying to do this with DIF if DIF doesn’t really want the group to come? The entire group is saying +1 but DIF is -1 so not following why we have wasted all our time when DIF was not ready to take the work? 01:36:50 Dan Burnett: +1 Orie. Agreement between IETF and W3C to work on WebRTC was not quick or easy either, but it worked in the end. 01:37:13 Dmitri Zagidulin: @katrynadow - DIF is +1 on everything so far, except they need lawyer review on the IPR part. which is understandable. 01:37:27 Rouven Heck: @Katry - it’s not that we don’t want, but we cannot change the legal agreemens in DIF now in a commmunity call 01:37:54 Nate Otto (Badgr/Csky): Glad to see these groups coming together and expressing a general desire to move forward. 01:38:03 Michael Benaudis - Internet Identity Card: + 1 Dan Burnett - Agreed it work in the end! 01:38:28 Manu Sporny (Digital Bazaar): PROPOSAL 4: The Identity Hubs and Encrypted Data Vaults documents will be used as use case, requirements, and technical input for the collaborative effort. The DID Comm, UMA, and OAuth2 work will continue in parallel and are acknowledged as important related work that might influence the direction of the collaborative effort. 01:38:45 Adrian Gropper: q+ 01:39:35 Sam Curren (TelegramSam): q+ 01:39:36 Michael Benaudis - Internet Identity Card: PROPOSAL 4: + 1 01:41:13 Dave Longley: a specific use case can always be discussed later and brought in if it's not already there 01:41:35 Dave Longley: this is just saying what we've got consensus to bring in 01:41:51 Thomas Hardjono: that’s correct about the users key not used for encrypting data 01:42:07 rhiaro: these documents as input / related are not the *only* ones right? this isn't a finished list necessarily 01:42:14 Dave Longley: right 01:42:30 Thomas Hardjono: homomorphic encryption uses server keys 01:42:36 Manu Sporny (Digital Bazaar): PROPOSAL 4: The Identity Hubs, Encrypted Data Vaults, and Adrian's use case documents will be used as use case, requirements, and technical input for the collaborative effort. The DID Comm, UMA, and OAuth2 work will continue in parallel and are acknowledged as important related work that might influence the direction of the collaborative effort. 01:42:43 Dave Longley: +1 01:42:45 Orie (Transmute): +1 01:42:46 Adrian Gropper: +1 01:42:51 Kaliya Identity Woman: +1 01:42:52 Daniel Buchner: Adrian gets a nice spotlight 01:42:56 Joe: +1 01:42:57 Thomas Hardjono: +1 01:42:58 BalazsN: +1 01:42:59 Orie (Transmute): (I will help with the concern) 01:42:59 Daniel Buchner: +1 01:42:59 Joachim Lohkamp (Jolocom): +1 01:43:04 Sam Curren (TelegramSam): +1 01:43:05 Dan Burnett: +1 01:43:06 Kaliya Identity Woman: Adrian has been doing some fanatic work to bridge all the communities. 01:43:07 Ken Ebert: +1 01:43:11 Troy Ronda: +1 01:43:15 Michael Benaudis - Internet Identity Card: +1 01:43:16 Chad Peiper (Verif-y): +1 01:43:17 Daniel Buchner: I am just joshing 01:43:24 Daniel Buchner: Love Adrian 01:43:30 Dan Burnett: I know "fanatic work" was a typo, but it's a fabulous one 01:43:36 Rouven Heck: Thanks Manu! 01:43:36 Daniel Buchner: haha 01:43:49 Joachim Lohkamp (Jolocom): Thanks everyone! 01:43:54 Michael Benaudis - Internet Identity Card: Thanks Manu ! 01:43:55 Thomas Hardjono: bye all 01:43:59 Dan Burnett: bye and thanks to scribes! 01:44:10 Kaliya Identity Woman: bye 01:44:12 Manu Sporny (Digital Bazaar): Yes, thank you Amy and Kaliya!