Re: Credentials CG charter vote result

Kim.  can you point to the old charter?
https://www.w3.org/community/credentials/page/5/  ?  I still can't find it?

On Sat, 21 Oct 2017 at 16:54 Timothy Holborn <timothy.holborn@gmail.com>
wrote:

> On Sat, 21 Oct 2017 at 16:51 Timothy Holborn <timothy.holborn@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Kim,
>>
>> apologies if the meta was difficult.
>>
>> Spec needs to support URIs.
>>
>
> oh.
>
> Given http-signatures[1] is now in a different group[2]. perhaps it
> doesn't matter.
>
> (guess it looks a bit like a backdoor listing, technically - i'm not sure
> it matters.)
>
> Tim.
>
> [1]  https://w3c-dvcg.github.io/
> [2] https://www.w3.org/community/digital-verification/
>
>
>> more later.
>>
>> Tim.H.
>>
>
>> On Sat, 21 Oct 2017 at 16:05 Kim Hamilton Duffy <kim@learningmachine.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hello Tim,
>>> Could you be precise about your concerns? I value directness.
>>>
>>> Best,
>>> Kim
>>>
>>> On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 8:53 PM Timothy Holborn <
>>> timothy.holborn@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi Adam,
>>>>
>>>> Cheers.  We've been doing some work in the area, indeed i'm doing some
>>>> work on it right now.
>>>>
>>>> seeAlso: (not exhaustively)
>>>> - https://github.com/schemaorg/schemaorg/issues/1437
>>>> - https://github.com/schemaorg/schemaorg/issues/1525
>>>>
>>>> and notably also:
>>>> https://www.w3.org/Talks/2001/12-semweb-offices/all.htm
>>>>
>>>> therein also; is the underlying assumption of a URI.
>>>>
>>>> Tim.
>>>>
>>>> On Sat, 21 Oct 2017 at 14:40 Adam Sobieski <adamsobieski@hotmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Tim,
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks for sharing those documents. Based upon the first problem that
>>>>> you indicate in your discussion, pertaining to types of articles, you might
>>>>> be interested in:
>>>>> https://w3c-ccg.github.io/verifiable-news/journalistic-schemas.html
>>>>> and https://schema.org/docs/news.html .
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>> Adam
>>>>>
>>>>> *From:* Timothy Holborn <timothy.holborn@gmail.com>
>>>>> *Sent:* ‎Friday‎, ‎October‎ ‎20‎, ‎2017 ‎9‎:‎24‎ ‎PM
>>>>> *To:* Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>, Kim Hamilton Duffy
>>>>> <kim@learningmachine.com>, public-credentials@w3.org
>>>>>
>>>>> and FWIW - Verifiable News?  i mean...  really?
>>>>>
>>>>> don't get me wrong.  it's an area i've been working on for some time
>>>>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1OPghC4ra6QLhaHhW8QvPJRMKGEXT7KaZtG_7s5-UQrw/edit#
>>>>> <https://docs.google.com/document/d/e/2PACX-1vQQLPzTjZ8JuI1ZPy-xx5KOFffroV9qEJGx7LllD57i3aEp-CpcH9s1tblgAwT2hU2H5uLtYKGnT7s5/pub> -
>>>>> indeed you'll even see the section i put in there "Linked-Data,
>>>>> Ontologies and Verifiable Claims"
>>>>> <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1OPghC4ra6QLhaHhW8QvPJRMKGEXT7KaZtG_7s5-UQrw/edit#heading=h.19e53f97toth>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> anyhow.  I just...  dunno.  Will get back to you.  Diversity is
>>>>> important...
>>>>>
>>>>> Tim.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Sat, 21 Oct 2017 at 12:05 Timothy Holborn <
>>>>> timothy.holborn@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I'll go through and do a proper review and respond more effectively;
>>>>>> noting,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 1. The call schedule is currently for the early hours of my morning.
>>>>>> I believe there were studies (can't find the link) that showed it doesn't
>>>>>> matter where people are in the world, scheduling global activities for
>>>>>> participation at 2am in the morning generally doesn't work for people.   I
>>>>>> guess, that's why the time of the call is not at that hour for you.   I
>>>>>> believe there were two issues about 2am calls, a. attendance and b. people
>>>>>> are grumpy / not at their best ;)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I've been trying to do more advocacy and related work here locally;
>>>>>> and as such, had to make choices.  (believing also, the work was in trusted
>>>>>> hands ;) ).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 2. The older materials weren't archived or available via some form of
>>>>>> version control; it was just all updated.   So, here am i looking for the
>>>>>> older references and the URIs, far from cool, said a very different story.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 3. Someone else asked about commenting on the RWOT Spec and the
>>>>>> suggestion was that it would be better if only those who attended the RWoT
>>>>>> event comment.  :(
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 4. I then did a review, to see whether my other core assumptions
>>>>>> about the work on VCs (ie: verifiable claim documents) was proceeding as
>>>>>> expected; and saw a bunch of stuff that well..
>>>>>>
>>>>>> all very unexpected.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 'identity' is too often over simplified and certainly also the
>>>>>> subject of actors seeking to usurp for commercial gains. to do otherwise is
>>>>>> so very, very complicated.  interestingly these issues do not appear to
>>>>>> negatively effect the 'identity' of legal persons ("persona ficta")
>>>>>> anywhere near the prevalence of problems for natural persons.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 5. HTTP-SIGNATURES in relation to RDF documents was / is a
>>>>>> beautifully simple solution to a variety of problems. It provided something
>>>>>> a WACd WebID otherwise could not do.  Whilst there are still an array of
>>>>>> issues about how to ensure the integrity of that document (and its secured
>>>>>> references), the previous charter explicitly stated "identity credentials"
>>>>>> and "http signatures"; both are lost in the new version.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I also see the works in OASIS (where some of it started from memory)
>>>>>> and some other dynamics which whilst i'm fully supportive of people doing
>>>>>> good things however they seek to;  felt it wasn't necessarily where i was
>>>>>> going - and the things i most cared about, seemed..
>>>>>>
>>>>>> well.  as a consequence of my flagging concerns, some changes have
>>>>>> already happened.  so i guess, some of my points must to some-degree have
>>>>>> been taken into consideration.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> i'll have another, better look into it.   I've been busy on related
>>>>>> works with some assumptions in-place, that i'll check are are ok.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> As noted; its my view that we need to ensure diversity, which is a
>>>>>> very important attribute of identity, depending on the definition used.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Sat, 21 Oct 2017 at 00:02 Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 10/19/2017 05:23 PM, Kim Hamilton Duffy wrote:
>>>>>>> > * <https://www.w3.org/community/credentials/charter-20140808/>
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> > As for the state of the previous work items, they seem to map to
>>>>>>> > more refined work items in progress now (e.g. DIDs) but I'm not
>>>>>>> > familiar with the history, so I'll let someone else weigh in.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I think the general take away is that the group discussed our new
>>>>>>> charter for multiple months, debated it on the calls, sent minutes
>>>>>>> out
>>>>>>> related to the debate to the mailing list, commented on the charter
>>>>>>> via
>>>>>>> Google Docs, discussed it at various RWoT events... net net - lots of
>>>>>>> discussion and debate went into the current charter before it was
>>>>>>> accepted per the CG process.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I think you flagged this at WWW2017 also.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The new charter we have now had consensus when it was passed at the
>>>>>>> time
>>>>>>> (and I suspect still has broad consensus).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That info should be added to the new charter as it was for the last
>>>>>> one. (ideally, without unnecessarily deleting history).
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -- manu
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Manu Sporny (skype: msporny, twitter: manusporny, G+: +Manu Sporny)
>>>>>>> Founder/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc.
>>>>>>> blog: Rebalancing How the Web is Built
>>>>>>> http://manu.sporny.org/2016/rebalancing/
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>> Kim Hamilton Duffy
>>> CTO & Principal Architect Learning Machine
>>> Co-chair W3C Credentials Community Group
>>> 400 Main Street Building E19-732, Cambridge, MA 02139
>>>
>>> kim@learningmachine.com | kimhd@mit.edu
>>> 425-652-0150 | LearningMachine.com
>>>
>>