W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-credentials@w3.org > November 2018

Re: Seeking to update Decentralized Identity related slides

From: Christopher Allen <ChristopherA@lifewithalacrity.com>
Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2018 00:54:45 +0100
Message-ID: <CACrqygBYk7VHKZ_d+iDuftgp=PnMpDXxqdwqoFDgedJ46tVYzQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Credentials Community Group <public-credentials@w3.org>
Thank you everyone for sharing your slides! Very helpful, though there were
many good ideas elsewhere I was unable to puzzle how to fit in. Next time.

I did succeed in updating a lot of the terminology for my talk tonight in
Zurich to the latest language & integrated at least a few of the better
approaches from others that I felt were more effective than my own. Also,
many thanks to Joe & Markus who reviewed over the weekend an early draft.

New to this talk is I explicitly separate the Ideology from the
Architecture, and each could potentially stand alone. I agree with Joe that
using the term “movement” rather than ideology is likely better, but I
didn’t change it as the title of talk was already advertised (and I think
I’d need new images).

I received a lot of positive feedback here in Switzerland on the ideology
part of the talk, but it still needs work. In particular I felt Kaliya’s
social context recursive triad definition of identity leads better into
DIDs than Joe’s functional identity definition. I like aspects of both but
wasn’t able to integrate them.

The Architecture section is weaker. I tried to explain why we focused on
DIDs first, but it wasn’t as easy a coherent story to tell. Best I’ve done
to date, but feel I lost even some of my tech audience there.

The story connection from DID Docs to VCs was particularly weak. Some tell
the story VC first/DIDs second, and I can see why, but right now the DID
story is more important. We know decentralized is important but we are not
yet effective is saying why yet.

A lot of stuff is missing in section on future work: not sure how to
present things like pair-wise DIDs & selective disclosure when only one
party plans to implement it. I work hard in my talks to be as
impartial/agnostic to blockchains and avoid single vendor specific
solutions as I can.

My final slides from last night are at:


I welcome comments, improvements, re-usage, etc.

— Christopher Allen
Received on Monday, 5 November 2018 23:55:21 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thursday, 24 March 2022 20:24:50 UTC