W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-credentials@w3.org > June 2015

Credentials CG Telecon Minutes for 2015-06-23

From: <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 2015 13:26:34 -0400
Message-Id: <1435080394688.0.16166@zoe>
To: Credentials CG <public-credentials@w3.org>
Thanks to Nate Otto and Manu Sporny for scribing this week! The minutes
for this week's Credentials CG telecon are now available:


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

Credentials Community Group Telecon Minutes for 2015-06-23

  1. Web Payments IG face-to-face in NYC
  2. Introduction to Matt Stone
  3. Current Status of Credentials at W3C
  4. Badge Alliance updates
  5. Focus on Recruiting New Members
  Manu Sporny
  Nate Otto and Manu Sporny
  Nate Otto, Manu Sporny, Richard Varn, Matt Stone, Eric Korb, 
  Sunny Lee, Dave Longley, Rob Trainer, David I. Lehn, Laura 
  Fowler, Gregg Kellogg, Brent Shambaugh

Nate Otto is scribing.
Manu Sporny:  Let's get started
Manu Sporny:  Today is mostly a sync-up. A lot of things have 
  happened over the last week, and today we can figure out what 
  next steps are based on what's happened over the last week and a 

Topic: Web Payments IG face-to-face in NYC

Manu Sporny:  Today: a recap of the Web Payments face to face in 
  New York, and a couple announcements from the Badge Alliance 
  about events happening there over the last couple weeks, and an 
  update on a renewed recruiting focus.
Manu Sporny:  We had three discussions about credentials at the 
  face to face. Thanks to Richard and Eric for coming. It really 
  helped to have them in the room.
Manu Sporny:  Unfortunately, I don't think the credentials 
  discussion went very well. Let me start off by saying the plan 
  was to talk about use cases around credentials that were 
  specifically related to payments.
Manu Sporny:  We started discussing that, but the discussion was 
  quickly derailed by some new payments members who weren't 
  familiar with any of the credentials work
Manu Sporny:  The initial conversation around credentials were 
  that they should not be put in the critical path for payments
Manu Sporny:  We had some resistence from Apple and Mozilla in 
Manu Sporny:  We almost immediately hit stiff opposition because 
  some of the new members were not familiar with the work.
Manu Sporny:  What they thought we were proposing was to put 
  credentials in the critical path of the payments work
Manu Sporny:  Once we started heading down that path of 
  conversation, it was very difficult to get everybody back on 
Manu Sporny:  Eric and Richard were able to jump in and say 
  credentials are important for education, for health care.
Manu Sporny:  The other group that wanted to see the credentials 
  work succeed were the long term payments group members, including 
  the banks who are familiar with the identity/credentials problem
Manu Sporny:  It was decided to discuss credentials again in the 
  breakout session the 2nd day
Manu Sporny:  Within 5 minutes, the breakout group decided that 
  credentials should proceed in parallel, that a working group 
  should be formed.
Manu Sporny:  We brought that conclusion to the main group (that 
  a credentials group should be formed, that it should be done in 
  parallel). Requested time on the third day to talk about 
  credentials then. Staff contacts felt that the new members in the 
  room had already talked about it enough and it shouldn't be added 
  to the agenda
Manu Sporny:  Staff heard loud and clear that people were 
  interested in credentials but thought that the group was split. 
  Manu disagrees with this conclusion, and thinks that the actual 
  proposal that's on the table would be agreeable to those members, 
  that their resistance was to something nobody was proposing.
Manu Sporny:  The good news is that people believe the the 
  credentials stuff is something the w3c should do at some point 
  (in the next year), but they weren't able to get that down as a 
  consensus decision of the whole group.
Richard Varn:  Given that we didn't ever envision this as an 
  integral part of the payments part, why are we talking to them as 
  if they are the approval entity when this is really a w3c 
  decision to make?
Manu Sporny:  They actually do need credentials/identity 
  verification in payments work. European banks particularly see 
  this as a hard requirement.
Manu Sporny:  The other reason is because the Payments Interest 
  Group is an official group whose charter includes the ability to 
  propose new working groups to start. They can fast track the 
  charter through w3c management.
Manu Sporny:  If we decide not to involve them, we have to do the 
  full w3c process, which would take a full year or so, when we 
  wanted it up and running by october ideally.
Manu Sporny:  This isn't to say we haven't been making good 
Manu Sporny:  If we had made the ideal progress at this meeting, 
  an interest group would be created, which would be doing the same 
  work that we're already doing.

Topic: Introduction to Matt Stone

Matt Stone:  I just rang in. I'm with Pearson. The division I'm 
  with is PearsonVue, which deals with high security testing in 
  brick and mortar facilities for high stakes assessments, nursing, 
  accountings etc.
Matt Stone:  We have a startup within Pearson called Acclaim that 
  is using the Mozilla Open Badges Specification, and we also have 
  an application called Credential Manager. I run the group in 
  charge of Acclaim and Credential Manager at Pearson.
Manu Sporny:  We reached out to Matt & Pearson to see if they're 
  interested in taking a leadership role with the potential working 
  group that could be formed at the W3C.

Topic: Current Status of Credentials at W3C

Manu Sporny:  The last bit at the face to face, was that there 
  was a roundtable on the last day, with large financial 
  institutions that after they finished the presentation said that 
  they didn't see anything about credentials / identity on there, 
  and that's their #1 priority.
Manu Sporny:  To wrap up, the mistake that I made was 
  underestimating the amount of influence the new members would 
  have, particularly if they didn't understand the proposal. 
  Because there was such a large group in the room (40 or so), it 
  was difficult to combat that.
Manu Sporny:  As far as next steps, I have calls scheduled with 
  staff contacts. WIll propose something about identity and 
  credentialing in Japan at TPAC.
Manu Sporny:  It would be good to have something there (a mini 
  workshop etc), because we'll have 500 people there
Eric Korb:  (Sorry missed a little bit there) - The frustration 
  for me was that during breakouts/lunch/dinner, there was a lot of 
  support for credentials, but people just didn't speak up.
Eric Korb:  But that's the standards process, and it's not going 
  to deter us. Richard and I did pursue to Manu that a stronger 
  place we could go could be IMS Global.
Eric Korb:  That could potentially position us in a stronger 
  place. But it really comes down to getting the support from the 
Eric Korb:  I think we continue to work, continue to work with 
  IMS, Badge Alliance, and stay the course.
Richard Varn:  Let me pile on. There are two kinds of people who 
  spoke up in opposition: vested interests in doing something 
  different, and another guy who didn't know much about anything 
  and overstated everything.
Richard Varn:  How is consensus defined? I'd rather work in a 
  place where you ask "who objects to this and why"? Why not ask 
  the group between meetings? .. if you object to this, what would 
  you have it do instead?"
Richard Varn:  I like the vote strategy -- think IMS Global 
  presents opportunities to do stuff with credentials that W3C 
  doesn't.Maybe with a yes-and in a health-care specific forum
Manu Sporny:  If W3C doesn't see people knocking on his door, 
  tell me where his door is, and we'll knock on it.
Manu Sporny:  W3C process doesn't require 100% consensus. 
  Unfortunately in the pre-consensus process, we got tied up and 
  never got past it. What I was trying to do by day 3 was to at 
  least collect some kind of consensus position from the group, and 
  we were blocked from doing that group. Mainly because the group 
  to there was to figure out what the payments charter would be, 
  and they removed everything noncritical from their path to that 
  which included the credentials stuff.
Richard Varn:  Is there an interim process? Can we ask between 
Manu Sporny:  Yes, but it takes longer in the interirm
Matt Stone:  Is the next opportunity TPAC?
Sunny Lee: Question: previously we were talking about fast track 
  status to a working group - what happens to the planning work 
  we've done to make this happen?
Manu Sporny:  The next opportunity is the next couple weeks. I'm 
  going to go back to the (mailing list) and start pushing them to 
  come up with some kind of consensus.
Manu Sporny:  At TPAC it would be good to shoot for the first 
  Credential WG meeting
Manu Sporny:  I think if we can create a charter by August, focus 
  on recruiting effort particularly strongly, we could still make 
  the TPAC start.
Sunny Lee: Manu, yes that's my question
Manu Sporny:  We can use a lot of the work we've been doing.
Manu Sporny:  We're doing the work that an IG would be doing 
  right now, if it were created
Manu Sporny:  Whether we're on the fast track or slow track, the 
  same work is still necessary
Manu Sporny:  The only real remaining thing to do to see if we 
  can do a fast track WG, is to get the groups in.
Manu Sporny:  Richard, to answer your question about what the w3c 
  ceo cares about, he cares about new large members. The W3C 
  doesn't like chartering new groups unless they can see success, 
  and the metric is about 30 organizations interested.
Nate Otto:  Could you give me an idea, I think you put recruiting 
  on the agenda a bit later, could you give us some basic TODOs on 
  what the people on the call can do to make the process happen? 
  [scribe assist by Dave Longley]
Manu Sporny:  Let's talk about recruiting at the last part of the 
Manu Sporny:  Let's get an update from the BA, and then talk 
  about recruiting
Manu Sporny:  Any more Qs on face to face?

Topic: Badge Alliance updates

Manu Sporny is scribing.
Nate Otto:  I can give you minor updates - on June 10th in Los 
  Angles, MacArthur and Mozilla Foundation convened a meeting - 
  contracted w/ Concentric Sky to get badges ecosystem together - 
  and others by conference call - goal was to figure out how 
  MacArthur/Mozilla would support Badge Alliance going forward.
Nate Otto:  Digital media and learning portfolio was spun out of 
  MacArthur - start being core supporter of badges - all badge work 
  came from DML portfolio, that's going to be a NewOrg - start 
  process of recommendations - transition point - what can we do to 
  make sure Badge Alliance most effectively supports necessary work 
  going forward.
Nate Otto:  I've been reaching out to folks on this call - how 
  badge alliance needs to act - what they need to focus on in order 
  to ensure the right supports for developing the standard are 
Nate Otto:  I think we're going to do greater focus on technical 
  standard itself. Done a great job of bringing in use cases, need 
  to deliver on high-quality experiences and implementations - very 
  nicely interoperable - support for W3C group - whatever this work 
  needs to happen - BA needs to support that as well.
Nate Otto:  I'm writing up recommendations for NewOrg - there 
  will be future announcements coming out - strongly committed to 
  making badges and online verifiable credential a part of online 
  educational requirements.
Sunny Lee:  Yep, sounds good.
Nate Otto:  If anyone is interested - Badges community has 
  meeting at 9am Pacific 
Nate Otto:  Will talk about this a bit this week and next week.
Manu Sporny:  When will the full announcement be made?
Nate Otto:  In a couple of weeks.
Nate Otto:  A little bit of wayfinding going on at the moment. 

Topic: Focus on Recruiting New Members

Nate Otto is scribing.
Manu Sporny:  Nate's question was what can people on this list do 
  to help recruit?
Manu Sporny:  Where we were was drafting this recruiting letter, 
  which is not done yet. We need to get that done. That's one 
Manu Sporny:  The other option is that people in this group can 
  take the base of the recruiting letter and send it to orgs they 
  know, tailored as needed for each of those groups. Divide and 
  conquor approach, everyone chases the leads they have.
Eric Korb:  A pointer, I'm more in favor of trying to craft your 
  own letter.
Eric Korb:  I see this more as a personal invitations at a peer 
  to peer (rolodex) level. What concerns about consistency and 
  message do we need to be aware of from a w3c process level?
Manu Sporny: Open Credentials Executive Summary: 
Matt Stone:  I think you're right -- let's get these down to a 
  list of 3-5 value propositions that we can each use to craft 
  letters to people we know
Manu Sporny: Current recruiting list: 
Eric Korb:  Question: I heard a comment about multiple people 
  both hitting the same prospects? Should we try to avoid that. I 
  thought the idea we could sign up for people we hoped to recruit. 
  I think it's ok to hear stereo from multiple people you trust, 
  but wanted to make sure that would be ok
Manu Sporny:  I think we shouldn't have people hammering one 
  company with four people contacting them at one time, so sign up 
  to chase after an organization, chase after them, and if you hit 
  a point wher eyou're not getting a good response, we'll figure 
  out how to hand it off to someone else in the group
Nate Otto:  I'm fine with that - move quickly - on weekly calls - 
  update on recruiting - update on handoff - make sure letters are 
  going out at a reasonable speed. [scribe assist by Manu Sporny]
Manu Sporny:  Ok
Manu Sporny:  Any other comments/concerns about recruiting stuff
Matt Stone:  What kinds of organizations are we trying to target 
  for this?
Manu Sporny:  The organizations that are the kind that will be 
  convincing to W3C. Large, multinational orgs with big engineering 
  resoruces. That's what W3C wants to see.
Manu Sporny:  From a statistical perspective, the orgs that 
  actually get the work done are smaller orgs, less than 50 people, 
  who have skin in the game because credentials are a core part of 
  their business.
Matt Stone:  When we're talking to the larger groups, do we have 
  the expectation from them to be a lot more from them than being a 
  voice in the chorus?
Manu Sporny:  The message we really send to large organizations 
  are that the dues are a secondary thing. The core is that this 
  tech is going to be a core part of your next generation products. 
  If you can't find a way to make that argument to a company, you 
  probably don't have the right company.
Manu Sporny:  For example, for ETS or Pearson, it's clear that 
  credentials and identity will be core to their next generation 
  products. We know that there is some product line that is going 
  to be affected by the work that's going here. You should really 
  take the time to be involved in the work, so you know how to be 
  involved in it when it comes to building your future products.
Richard Varn:  We have an ecosystem map of types of companies 
  involved if that would be helpful
Manu Sporny:  Eric has put this graphic into some presentations
Richard Varn:  That lends some structure to the discussion.
Richard Varn:  Then if nobody knows a person from some of the 
  companies in the map, we can just split them up and talk to them
Richard Varn:  You might find that there are some company types 
  that you'd be surprised care about this.
Manu Sporny:  I think at this point we should try to coordinate 
  less, and just start going after leads.
Nate Otto:  Question - Is there room for people in credentialing 
  organizations, the actual issuers?
Manu Sporny:  Yes, there is great reason for folks on the 
  business side, consumer protection, etc. Try to get a holistic 
  group of people together to work on the standard, not just 
  technology providers.
Eric Korb:  It's fair to say that for educational institutions 
  would be good to have here as well.
Manu Sporny:  The problem we've had with universities is they 
  find it really hard to send representatives to participate in the 
  work. The people who end up showing up are graduate students, who 
  tend only to stick around for a couple years before they get 
  their pHDs and leave. You're right that the fees are very low for 
  a university to join, and if the university is involved in the 
  future of crednetials and badging, then it makes perfect sense 
  for them to join.
Manu Sporny:  4 Minutes left. Unless anyone objects, I think 
  we're going to shift into recruiting mode, and get as many people 
  involved in the work as possible.
Manu Sporny:  Goal is to convince the w3c that there is a large 
  community of people who want this to happen quickly.
Dave Longley:  Is the goal for these companies to contact the w3c 
  directly or to make commitments to us that we can communicate to 
  the W3C?
Manu Sporny:  The second approach. Jeff would hate me if we told 
  everybody to email him directly.
Manu Sporny:  Any other business?
Manu Sporny:  Thank you everyone for the call and the ideas and 
  helping to step up and recruit people. I think, let's start ASAP. 
  If the next thing you do after you get off this call is pick up 
  the phone to recruit someone, that would be great.
Manu Sporny:  Next week: an update on recruiting, and see 
  everyone on the mailing list in the interim.
Received on Tuesday, 23 June 2015 17:27:04 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:17:46 UTC