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

-------- Forwarded Message --------
Subject:  Re: Comments on draft charter [Was: Agenda: Verifiable Claims
Teleconference - Tuesday, March 8th 2016]
Resent-Date:  Fri, 11 Mar 2016 18:42:39 +0000
Resent-From:  public-credentials@w3.org
Date:  Fri, 11 Mar 2016 11:42:11 -0700
From:  Stone, Matt <matt.stone@pearson.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?

-stone


=====
Matt Stone
501-291-1599


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


    > On Mar 11, 2016, at 12:19 PM, Stone, Matt <matt.stone@pearson.com
<mailto: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 <mailto:ij@w3.org>>
    http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs
    Tel:                       +1 718 260 9447 <tel:%2B1%20718%20260%209447>

Received on Saturday, 12 March 2016 17:43:26 UTC