[MINUTES] W3C Credentials CG Call - 2019-04-16 12pm ET

Thanks to Manu Sporny for scribing this week! The minutes
for this week's Credentials CG telecon are now available:


Full text of the discussion follows for W3C archival purposes.
Audio from the meeting is available as well (link provided below).

Credentials CG Telecon Minutes for 2019-04-16

  1. Introductions / Reintroductions
  2. Annoucements and Reminders
  3. Action Items
  4. Survey Results
  Christopher Allen and Joe Andrieu and Kim Hamilton Duffy
  Manu Sporny
  Andrew Hughes, Amy Guy, Kim Hamilton Duffy, Heather Vescent, Manu 
  Sporny, Christopher Allen, Markus Sabadello, Vaughan Emery, Joe 
  Andrieu, Yancy Ribbens, Lionel Wolberger, Lucas Parker, Drummond 
  Reed, Ted Thibodeau, Ken Ebert, Michael Hawkins, Brent Zundel, 
  Moses Ma, Kaliya Young, Dmitri Zagidulin, Jonathan Holt, Dan 
  Burnett, Jeff Orgel

Manu Sporny is scribing.
Kim Hamilton Duffy:  We have our usual starting items... will 
  spend most of the call doing a follow up on survey results, 
  didn't have enough time for it... if we get through that, we 
  should do code of conduct.
Kim Hamilton Duffy:  IP Note -- anyone can participate, if you 
  haven't agreed to groups IP policy, don't say anything important. 
Kim Hamilton Duffy: https://w3c-ccg.github.io/meetings/
Kim Hamilton Duffy:  We keep meeting minutes there ^^^
Kim Hamilton Duffy:  I have the survey results links & have 
  prepped a zoom screenshare if people want to dig into the 
  results. There were questions about the details of the results 
  last time we discussed. [scribe assist by Heather Vescent]
Kim Hamilton Duffy:  Use IRC to queue people, take minutes, etc.
Kim Hamilton Duffy:  All attendees should type: present+
Kim Hamilton Duffy:  To add yourself to the queue: q+ DID spec 
  needs better SEO

Topic: Introductions / Reintroductions

Michael Hawkins:  Hi, Michael Hawkins joining for the first time 
  -- looking to build a DID wallet, interested in that side of 
Lucas Parker:  Hi, Lucas Parker - work with Kim at Learning 
  Machine, Senior Engineer over there.
Fwiw I'm having trouble connecting to the SIP bridge

Topic: Annoucements and Reminders

Kim Hamilton Duffy: https://w3c-ccg.github.io/announcements/
Kim Hamilton Duffy: https://zoom.us/j/7077077007
@Manu not a firewall issue on my end
Kim Hamilton Duffy: 1-2PM PT / 20:00-21:00 UTC.
Kim Hamilton Duffy:  DID calls happening 1pm-2pm time on 
Kim Hamilton Duffy: https://www.internetidentityworkshop.com
Kim Hamilton Duffy:  IIW is coming up soon
You say "expensive" as if long-distance phone calls are still a 
Markus Sabadello: DID Spec and DID Resolution Spec Weekly Meeting 
Kim Hamilton Duffy:  There is a Decentralized Identity Hackathon 
  happening... SSI Interop proof of concept. Kaliya, given that IIW 
  is coming up -- anything you want to add?
Kaliya Young:  We got more space at the museum, we were growing, 
  if you want to come and you want a discount, reach out to me.

Topic: Action Items

Kim Hamilton Duffy: 
Dmitri Zagidulin:  About the DID call... for CCG Work Items, like 
  a new DID Method, would the place to discuss it be the DID calls 
  or here?
Kim Hamilton Duffy:  It would be this call - saw your email - 
  will talk about it next call - give 5-10 minutes to discuss it. 
  Should have mentioned that in the thread, but would talk about it 
  here first.
Kim Hamilton Duffy:  Did you open a github issue on that?
Dmitri Zagidulin:  Yes, did that.
Kim Hamilton Duffy: 
I'm on now fwiw 🤷‍♀️
Manu Sporny:  We're working on it - tripling bandwidth...
Kim Hamilton Duffy:  Sounds good.
Manu Sporny:  Just wanted to draw people's attention to the 
  issues raised on the DID specifcation.
Kimhd says something amazing (scribe missed it)
Kim Hamilton Duffy:  UPort deprecated, Dominode isn't 
  responding... we should change this to be associated with DID 
  Method Registry.
Kim Hamilton Duffy:  We might only have one that is status 
  unknown... how do we track things that are deprecated? I think I 
  opened an issue on DID Method registry, so we should deal w/ that 
  there. Should close this item after Chairs discuss at the end of 
  the week. Any comments/concerns?
Manu Sporny:  +1 To that approach.
Kim Hamilton Duffy: 
Kim Hamilton Duffy:  LD Key Format registry administrivia...
Kim Hamilton Duffy:  Manu said We need to extend that registry to 
  also suggest key formats, which are naturally a part of each 
  cryptosuite specification.
Dmitri Zagidulin:  No updates, manu?
Kim Hamilton Duffy:  I'll move this to LD Cryptosuite Registry as 
  an issue.
Kim Hamilton Duffy:  JWK cryptosuite specifications
Kim Hamilton Duffy:  We need someone from DIF to be assigned to 
  be lead on this... dmitri included a link to JWT task force 
  call... Oliver did some updates on Verifiable Credentials spec 
  about this... any of this touched on in there? Anyone have any 
  comments on this issue?
Kim Hamilton Duffy: 
Christopher Allen:  One of my main concerns here is that there is 
  a lot of push to have this support, but I'm also not seeing a 
  spec in the broader sense. It's being talked about in the 
  Verifiable Claims WG, and the issues about doing this, but there 
  isn't really the equivalent for the CCG for signing other things 
  like DIDs, etc.
Christopher Allen:  If this is something people are saying "we 
  have to support" I'd like to see a spec for it in the CCG.
Kim Hamilton Duffy:  I think we need to find an owner for this.

Topic: Survey Results

Kim Hamilton Duffy:  Heather and Karn are going to be leading 
  this... perhaps we should do a quick review of what we covered. 
  We didn't make it through entire document w/ results overview... 
  please continue through that and perhaps go in depth for anything 
  you felt rushed through last week.
Kim Hamilton Duffy:  We were interested if you were able to or 
  give additional details around engagement, specifically. Perhaps 
  some questions about that?
Kim Hamilton Duffy:  We don't want to provide any PII as a part 
  of the survey results... just cover anything relevant that you 
  feel is appropriate.
Kim Hamilton Duffy:  How we can go about getting suggestions from 
  the community, that's great, but not in scope for this work 
  item... that's why you should feel free for whatever flow you 
  feel is appropriate.
Kim Hamilton Duffy:  After you've been able to review survey 
  results, I'd like to have a community discussion about next steps 
  -- things we can do to improve engagement, address problems 
  around perceptions (overly technical, etc.), anything along those 
  lines... suggestions on how we can improve things.
Kim Hamilton Duffy:  Heather and Karn, over to you.
Heather Vescent:  A couple of things prepared...
Heather Vescent:  Let's recap the survey first that we covered 
  last time.
Heather Vescent:  I've also setup a zoom... want to be able to 
  share my screen... after we go through survey results, we can do 
  screen share in Zoom.
Heather Vescent:  There are great charts, no PII, then address 
  specific questions.
Heather Vescent:  Survey results were synthesized, digested, then 
  we can discuss.
Heather Vescent:  Then talk about what we want to do with the 
Heather Vescent:  High points again... Karn, once we get to  your 
  sections, please jump in on some of your points.
Heather Vescent: Survey results: 
Heather Vescent:  Let us get through presenting information 
  before you queue up, please take notes then ask questions when we 
  open it up.
Heather Vescent:  We are not looking for comments on the 
  document... questions wrt "I want to know more information, 
  etc."... no need to edit the document, we're not doing a revision 
  of it, anything we do going forward will be a separate things.
Heather Vescent:  Also, don't shoot the messenger, this is our 
  analysis of survey data, if you want a PII-cleaned doc, happy to 
  give anyone else that wants to do analysis that information, but 
  please if you do, turn it around in a timely manner.
Heather Vescent:  Key points...
Heather Vescent:  Don't take these comments as good/bad - it's 
  just information, and what we want to do with it.
Heather Vescent:  This is meant to make us more conscious of how 
  we proceed. I do have some concerns wrt. how the group runs, but 
  it also has been successful in getting a number of important 
  things done.
Heather Vescent:  After a survey, you tend to go to some sort of 
  strategic plan...
Heather Vescent:  So, inclusion, diversity, W3C - W3C tends to 
  focus on technical activities... use cases have been worked on...
Heather Vescent:  We seem to be very focused in North America and 
  those groups drive the standards, difficult to attend calls in 
  non-North American locations.
Heather Vescent:  That means it's difficult to influence the 
  standards if you're not in North America.
HvescThe Core Group knows how to make things happen, but there is 
  a larger group around that is not as clear wrt. how to make 
  things work/go forward.
Heather Vescent:  People exist that want to help w/ the work, but 
  are unable to do so.
Heather Vescent:  There is a set of people that know how the 
  process works, but a larger group that is unsure.
Heather Vescent:  This group does a lot of stuff, but the roadmap 
  is not clear - it's not clear where consensus is in some areas... 
  what work should be done in 2019... some stuff is clear like DID 
  spec and DID WG... universal resolver, etc... but there is a long 
  tail of a lot of other things, some get done, some don't... 
  checking in w/ a lot of different things we're doing.
Heather Vescent:  Because focus is unclear, difficult for 
  volunteers to contribute... those people are not in the core 
  group... there needs to be a place where people that want to 
  volunteer can get involved in... that is more of a wall that 
  needs to be overcome now than the group would like.
Heather Vescent:  2019 Priorities seemed to be DID Auth, DID 
  spec, and DID WG as top priorities.
Heather Vescent:  4 Different categories - work being done, 
  organization, operations, and what to do in 2019.  Just because 
  people said "X" ... it's one data point, if we wanted to have 
  focused goals for 2019, it would be one data point entry... you 
  don't have to take this as "this is what we have to and want to 
Heather Vescent:  The top 3 accomplishments were: Work on the DID 
  Spec, General Technical discussions/activities moving forward DID 
  understanding and clarification, and Community cohesion: creating 
  the place to have the technical conversations.
Heather Vescent:  There was no consensus in the replies with the 
  exception of two comments about improving the DID spec. There was 
  no consensus on next work items...
Heather Vescent:  There is an interesting graph... alignment w/ 
  other digital verification standards... people said 
Heather Vescent: BTW - It's Karn.
Heather Vescent:  Interesting to see what's not controversial, 
  but not heavily supported.
Heather Vescent: No worries. :-)
Karn: I thought by participating it would help me understand how 
  the group works.
Karn: This is about organization... wanted to get a sense about 
  roadblocks to participating/contributing to ongoing work...
Karn: How does the group function? That's what we were interested 
  in... roadmap of interests and roadblocks are interesting.
Karn: How CCG works: 27 out of 44 respondents did not know, 
  weren’t sure or mostly knew how the CCG groups work was proposed 
  and incubated. 17 respondents knew how the group functions.
Karn: Regarding the roadmap - most folks said that there is a 
  lack of clear roadmap and achievable goals in short to medium 
Karn: Personally, the work feels like it's slowing - either there 
  is not clarity on objectives or there is a lack of clear 
Karn: We were trying to guage the interest of participants - most 
  of them are interested because it's an emerging technology, 
  trend... that's why people are interested.
Karn: They might see applications in healthcare, digital 
  advertising, etc... but more specific in Verifiable Credentials, 
  helping w/ IPFS, helping w/ work items... working at IIW and 
Karn: Major road blocks are funding, understanding of previous 
Karn: Roadblocks for contributing, major roadblocks listed were 
  funding and previous current work... what and how to contribute.
Karn: There are missing constituencies... Geographical: Missing 
  Asia-Pac, broader European, Australia, and individuals outside of 
  North America. ... Area of expertise: Missing lawyers, VCs, 
  government, non-coders, builders & implementers, PGP developers, 
  cryptographic engineers, cryptographers, identity academics, and 
  real active digital human rights activists.... 
  Companies/Communities: Missing startups (not necessarily identity 
  focused), Sovrin, Civic, Blockstack
& Indieweb communities. ... Gender diversity was also mentioned 
  as lacking.
Karn: If there were clear work items, then people might be able 
  to engage. I do have a clear idea of where the work is going ... 
  but not clear how we move those sections forward...
Karn: What were decisions taken for previous sections, one way 
  people can do that is go through transcripts of CCG meetings... I 
  tried doing that... it's disorienting... documenting major 
  decisions might be helpful.
Karn: Moving on to CCG Operations...
Karn: This section (questions 6-16) of the survey ask the 
  participants questions regarding the efficacy of the current 
  means of operation viz. emails and phone calls.
Karn: Mailing list seemed to be working well...
Karn: Mailing list is productive use of time - good place for 
  discussion - good forum... some areas need improvement -- got 
  main ones out of feedback... email is not a right forum to track 
  discussions, we need threading.
Karn: Lack of non-technical discussions... long discussions 
  should probably be meetings... more moderation against personal 
Karn: Regarding weekly calls, the feedback was...
Karn: 27/37 attend or mostly attend the calls.... 11/35 think 
  that the technology used for the calls could be better.... 20/36 
  think that the weekly calls are productive.
Karn: Things that are working well: Working well: Agenda, action 
  items, accountability and good range of interests.
Karn: Things that need to improve -- give more time to prepare - 
  make it once in two weeks, send agenda in advance - not night 
  before, better interpersonal rules of engagement, speed is 
  glacial, need better info on how to join calls, need more focus, 
  don’t argue JSON LD vs JWT on calls, difficult to contribute, too 
  many overlapping calls.
Heather Vescent:  The last section -- 2019 Priorities
Heather Vescent:  I couldn't resist asking about where people 
  wanted to go in the future... key findings is that there are two 
  buckets of responses.
Heather Vescent:  These are top 4 technical things -- DID Auth 
  (4), DID Spec + DID WG (3), DID Resolver (3), Verifiable 
  Credentials (3),
Heather Vescent:  There are non-technical suggestions as well -- 
  The story of standards and how fit into the bigger picture: 
  Marketization, More thorough use cases, Amira engagement model, 
  Taxonomy of terms
Heather Vescent:  There also seems to be a gap in communication - 
  technologists tend to be not so great at articulating the 
  non-technical benefits to a non-mainstream audience.
Kim Hamilton Duffy: I got disconnected!
Heather Vescent:  So, where do we go from here? This shows where 
  we've come from and where we can improve... That this group 
  supported this work is a great step in the right direction. Don't 
  be discouraged, I think we're doing a lot of things right... now, 
  how do we do better, this gives us some idea...
Kim Hamilton Duffy: I'm back
Heather Vescent:  We specifically did not provide 
  recommendations... we didn't have the hubris to say what needed 
  to be done next... this is a community discussion... where do we 
  want to go together?
Heather Vescent:  Let's open up the floor for questions... we can 
  zoom screen share w/o audio to see surveymonkey results.
Kim Hamilton Duffy:  I wanted to chime in w/ some take aways - 
  subsequent conversations... one of the biggest things -- how to 
  jump in and help.
Kim Hamilton Duffy:  The only things I've done are things I'm 
  driving... things get done if people just jump in and do it... as 
  something I'm driving or co-driving, BUT if it is something high 
  context, like the DID spec, there are several flavors to it... 
  jumping into DID spec itself might cause more harm than good.
Kim Hamilton Duffy:  There are other ways to get involved... not 
  pull requests on the spec, but things like use cases, test cases, 
  communication tools, etc. If there are these high context items, 
  clearly people involved are overly burdened, perhaps taking the 
  time to articulate volunteer opportunities... last section that 
  you highlighted, have people take those on as work items...
Kim Hamilton Duffy:  If people are having issues, if it's not 
  technical, maybe it gets marginalized, which we don't want people 
  to come away with that.
Heather Vescent:  Something that could be useful, to shift 
  leadership method - we currently have a submit and drive 
  leadership model... whoever submits does the work, that works to 
  a certain point... could we do collaborative? Pair programming?
Heather Vescent:  I asked for help from mailing list... when you 
  do pair programming, you're sharing doing stuff 
  collaboratively... the lead is to step back and ensure that 
  person can move into leadership role in safe place.
Kim Hamilton Duffy: I was also thinking the mentorship/collab 
  model would be a good way to knowledge transfer
Heather Vescent:  This is something, as a woman, that I approach 
  more readily than other personality types... collaborative 
  approach is more effective wrt. ensuring volunteers step up and 
  volunteers are successful... also need to create environment that 
  volunteer is successful as well as the work.
Heather Vescent:  I think if we can expand thinking, expand 
  leadership model to include this, it would be good. If we make 
  this technology real, that's going to happen at some point.
Kim Hamilton Duffy: +1 To time set aside for engagement
Manu Sporny:  I think it's important that we set aside some time 
  to discuss all of this.
Manu Sporny:  On the weekly calls, for example.
Christopher Allen:  There is a change happening soon, with luck 
  and a lot of hard work being done, DID spec and is going to be 
  working out of CCG.. moving to new DID WG... because of W3C 
  rules, will only be available to W3C groups... this group will 
  lose a lot of energy to the WG... perhaps we can use this as an 
  opportunity to work on things.
Christopher Allen:  I think there will be a big split of 
  energy... similarly, VCWG will be shutting down soon, finished 
  spec, and they will be bringing us a different set of 
  problems/energy, since we're the continuity piece... I think that 
  will give us momentum to change those sort sof things.
Moses Ma: Bye folks!
Kim Hamilton Duffy:  Thanks Christopher, and with that, we're out 
  of time for today.

Received on Sunday, 21 April 2019 03:06:07 UTC