Re: Two reports of potential interest to CCG list: Market Gaps in Corporate and IOT Identity & Security of Voter Data

On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 11:12 AM Heather Vescent <heathervescent@gmail.com>
wrote:

> My company recently released two reports that may be of interest to this
> community.
>
> *1: Entities, Identities, Registries: Exploring the Market Gaps in
> Corporate and IoT Identity: http://bit.ly/NPEreport
> <http://bit.ly/NPEreport>*
> This 32 page graphic heavy report, Entities, Identities, Registries,
> explains what Non-Person Entities are (NPEs), the relationships NPEs have
> with humans and each other, and identifies market gaps in today's
> technology solutions. This report identifies 11 market gaps - problems the
> private sector is not successfully/comprehensively solving to date.
>

Heather,

Thank you for this opportunity! I think this document is particularly
relevant.

I feel this report in particular seems like that it could be quite suitable
as a "Community Commentary" published by the CCG, but it might also be
useful as a "Community Note" to forward to the upcoming DID WG as it could
help address the issue of DIDs for entities that are not necessarily
individual people.

As a "Community Commentary", it may not have to necessarily be converted to
Respec format (though many would appreciate that), but it would need to
some minimal community process (mostly "no principled objections" to the
content) and to accept any notices and IP requirements that the W3C
requires of CGs. As we've never published a Community Commentary before, we
have to investigate how to conform with those requirements. For it to be
considered as a "Community Note" it would definitely need to be converted
to Respec, but we'd also need some confirmation from the as yet unknown
future DID WG chairs that they would be interested in accepting it as well.
I suggest that we start it as "Community Commentary" for now.

Is there someone besides yourself in the community that could serve as an
co-editor for this "Community Commentary"? Is there someone willing to help
Heather convert it to Respec? Are there others interested in non-human DIDs
that might suggest some useful clarifications or additions as an iteration?

Heather, for now would you post this as a new work item proposal in
https://github.com/w3c-ccg/community/issues, and the chairs will schedule a
time to discuss it in one of our Tuesday meetings. As it is relatively
complete, we might be able to take it through the process from proposal to
final relatively quickly. This would makes it a great example to
demonstrate how the CCG work item process functions.

-- Christopher Allen