Re: Web Payments IG approves Verifiable Claims to proceed to W3C Management

Tim,

I was not at the meeting nor am I am objector.  I just know the players and
am pretty confident that was what was meant.  I agree that having a
position statement from the various objectors would be useful.  I am not
sure how likely it is, however.  Here's hoping!

On Tue, Jul 5, 2016 at 11:20 AM, Timothy Holborn <timothy.holborn@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Hi Shane,
>
> If you would like to provide a report as noted previously, please feel
> that the invite is open...
>
> I believe it is important that this decision make process is transparent
> and reliably informative for all those donating their time and materials in
> progressing this work in good faith.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Tim.H.
>
> On Wed, 6 Jul 2016 at 02:01 Shane McCarron <shane@spec-ops.io> wrote:
>
>> I am reasonably certain that what was meant by 'education' was the
>> Education Industry as a vertical that requires verifiable claims.  Clearly
>> while we could limit the charter to addressing problems in that space,
>> there are many other industries that would benefit from claims (see the
>> ID2020 data, the use case document, etc.)
>>
>> On Mon, Jul 4, 2016 at 10:10 PM, Timothy Holborn <
>> timothy.holborn@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Also,
>>>
>>> We need a clear definition of 'education'.
>>> IE:
>>>
>>> To Educate W3C related stakeholders about a set of specified
>>> methodologies that may be used to define a verifiable claims ecosystem for
>>> a plurality of applications.
>>>
>>> arguably stakeholders are any human who depends upon or is influenced by
>>> web use and the application of related technologies via various business
>>> systems models.
>>>
>>> Perhaps they had a different view of the term 'education'?  therein
>>> referring back to the prior request outlined here [1]
>>>
>>> Tim.H.
>>> [1]
>>> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-credentials/2016Jul/0005.html
>>>
>>> On Tue, 5 Jul 2016 at 11:06 Timothy Holborn <timothy.holborn@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Is it possible that those providing objection provide a 1 - 2 pager,
>>>> each, outlining their concerns and understandings more broadly driving
>>>> their decision making processes and subsequent directions to us.
>>>>
>>>> It is important we understand the point of view of these stakeholders
>>>> in a comprehensive fashion as to ensure we act in a manner supported by
>>>> what might be considered a reasonable request for due-diligence.
>>>>
>>>> This in-turn would empower us to improve what we do for smooth
>>>> development into the future, including but not exclusive to, any further
>>>> processing required by said stakeholders and us fully understanding their
>>>> expectations, beliefs and underlying considerations.
>>>>
>>>> I hope this is not too onerous on any party.
>>>>
>>>> Again, congratulations and great work...
>>>>
>>>> Tim Holborn.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, 5 Jul 2016, 3:32 AM Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>
>>>>> The Web Payments Interest Group met last week at MIT in Boston to
>>>>> determine if they wanted to proceed with the Verifiable Claims work.
>>>>> While the minutes of those meetings won't be made public for the next
>>>>> week or two, W3C Staff noted that we can share the general outcome of
>>>>> the decision.
>>>>>
>>>>> The decision was almost unanimous to progress the Verifiable Claims
>>>>> proposal to W3C Management. Hooray! Congratulations to everyone
>>>>> involved
>>>>> as this is a major step forward.
>>>>>
>>>>> There were, however, three dissenting positions that we should take
>>>>> very
>>>>> seriously and discuss in depth over the next few weeks. The telecon for
>>>>> this week is canceled because many of us are at the Web Payments
>>>>> Working
>>>>> Group face-to-face meeting in London this week. So, the rest of this
>>>>> email will attempt to outline general next steps and specific work
>>>>> items
>>>>> for the group.
>>>>>
>>>>> The anticipated next steps at W3C are:
>>>>>
>>>>> 1. A modified charter is negotiated with W3C Management and the
>>>>>    dissenting organizations.
>>>>> 2. Once we have consensus among all organizations involved, the
>>>>>    expectation is that the modified charter and proposal will be put
>>>>>    forward to W3C membership for a vote. The timeline for this is
>>>>>    unknown at this point.
>>>>> 3. We will most likely attempt to have a Verifiable Claims
>>>>>    face-to-face meeting at W3C TPAC 2016, but have not sorted out
>>>>>    those details yet: https://www.w3.org/2016/09/TPAC/
>>>>>
>>>>> We know of the following modification requests to the charter:
>>>>>
>>>>> 1. Constrain the charter to Education only.
>>>>> 2. Demonstrate that the charter is not competitive to JSON Object
>>>>>    Signing and Encryption Web Tokens (JOSE JWT).
>>>>> 3. Remove or greatly narrow the overarching problem statement
>>>>>    about self-sovereign ecosystem and goals from the charter.
>>>>>
>>>>> The anticipated next steps for the Verifiable Claims Task Force and
>>>>> Credentials Community Group are:
>>>>>
>>>>> 1. Determine if we want to constrain the charter to Education only.
>>>>> 2. Update the Data Model and Representations specification to clearly
>>>>>    demonstrate that this technology is not competitive to JOSE/JWT.
>>>>> 3. Determine if we want to modify the problem statement and
>>>>>    charter goals.
>>>>> 4. Plan our first face-to-face meeting, possibly at W3C TPAC in
>>>>>    Lisbon at the end of September.
>>>>>
>>>>> W3C Staff are currently drafting changes that they think would result
>>>>> in
>>>>> consensus. Once we have those suggestions in hand, and once we've
>>>>> talked
>>>>> with the dissenting organizations, we'll be able to have a better idea
>>>>> about timeline.
>>>>>
>>>>> The next Verifiable Claims telecon will be Tuesday, July 12th at 11am
>>>>> ET. Dial in details can be found here:
>>>>>
>>>>> https://w3c.github.io/vctf/#telecons
>>>>>
>>>>> -- manu
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Manu Sporny (skype: msporny, twitter: manusporny, G+: +Manu Sporny)
>>>>> Founder/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc.
>>>>> blog: The Web Browser API Incubation Anti-Pattern
>>>>> http://manu.sporny.org/2016/browser-api-incubation-antipattern/
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Shane McCarron
>> Projects Manager, Spec-Ops
>>
>


-- 
Shane McCarron
Projects Manager, Spec-Ops