W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-credentials@w3.org > June 2016

Re: Agenda: Verifiable Claims Teleconference - Tuesday, June 7th 2016

From: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
Date: Tue, 7 Jun 2016 22:34:51 -0400
To: public-credentials@w3.org
Message-ID: <5757844B.5070200@digitalbazaar.com>
On 06/07/2016 01:05 PM, Steven Rowat wrote:
> On 6/7/16 9:25 AM, Christopher Allen wrote:
>> On Tuesday, June 7, 2016, Daniel Burnett <danielcburnett@gmail.com
>>  <mailto:danielcburnett@gmail.com>> wrote:
>> Just to follow up on my final suggestion during the call.  My 
>> intent was to suggest that, as best we can without destroying the 
>> verbal flow of our documents, we consider noting that the term 
>> 'consumer' is still under discussion and may change to another
>> word in the future.
>> Confusion on that word in Verifiable Claims docs definitely has 
>> caused some problems for me recently — everyone's first reaction
>> is B2C, which it is not.
> +1 on the B2C common usage confusion.
> +1 on "Inspector", as now used in the Architecture document.
> Can this be used throughout the documents right away?

The straw poll to do that failed during the call today.

We're going to punt the discussion to the mailing list in the next day
or two, followed by a week-long poll to make the final decision as we
had a number of abstentions.

I suggest we:

1. Get all of the options on the table (consumer, reader, inspector,
   reviewer, receiver, etc.)
2. People provide their arguments for/against (and specifically avoid
   "me too"s
3. We do a single transferable vote (rank your picks from most favored
   to least favored) in the group to determine the final choice.

-- manu

Manu Sporny (skype: msporny, twitter: manusporny, G+: +Manu Sporny)
Founder/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc.
JSON-LD Best Practice: Context Caching
Received on Wednesday, 8 June 2016 02:35:16 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:17:53 UTC