- From: David Chadwick <D.W.Chadwick@kent.ac.uk>
- Date: Sat, 1 Oct 2016 09:39:05 +0100
- To: public-credentials@w3.org
Hi Manu my immediate comment upon reading the new charter, is "why isn't a SAML assertion a verifiable claim?". When I read it with the SAML model in mind, it seems to me that it fits the charter, and hence many (particularly new) readers might argue that the work is not needed. Don't you think the charter ought to contain the definition for a verifiable claim in order to make it crystal clear to the reader what we are talking about? regards David On 30/09/2016 03:54, Manu Sporny wrote: > Hi all, > > Based on Wendy's feedback since W3C TPAC 2016: > > https://github.com/w3c/webpayments-ig/issues/44 > > A new version of the Verifiable Claims Charter Proposal for W3M has been > prepared with the following changes: > > * The Problem Statement and Goals section has been moved into to a > Charter Motivations document. > * The dates have been adjusted to provide a less aggressive timeline to > get to CR. > * The chairs and staff contact participation have been marked "TBD". > * A diff-marked version based on the previous charter approved by the > Verifiable Claims Task Force has been generated. > > The new charter can be viewed here: > > http://w3c.github.io/webpayments-ig/VCTF/charter/rc-3.html > > A diff-marked copy is here: > > http://w3c.github.io/webpayments-ig/VCTF/charter/rc-3-diff.html > > W3M-specific landing page for next Wednesday's meeting is here: > > http://w3c.github.io/webpayments-ig/VCTF/w3m.html > > Please let me know if there are any concerns or issues with the prepared > material. > > -- manu >
Received on Saturday, 1 October 2016 08:39:42 UTC