Re: DID WG Charter -- Editorial PRs

That table looks horrible in plaintext of course. Here's a reformatted
version in case that hurt your eyes, and the csv attached again.
Thanks,
Kim

Issue: https://github.com/w3c-ccg/did-wg-charter/issues/5
PR: https://github.com/w3c-ccg/did-wg-charter/pull/6
Description: DID charter needs to include defining the scheme itself

Issue: https://github.com/w3c-ccg/did-wg-charter/issues/9
PR: https://github.com/w3c-ccg/did-wg-charter/pull/24
Description: Clarify that working set of DID use cases will be used as
input to the DID WG, but they are not meant to be the definitive list. I.e.
the WG will continue to iterate on use cases.

Issue: https://github.com/w3c-ccg/did-wg-charter/issues/15
PR: https://github.com/w3c-ccg/did-wg-charter/pull/30
Description: Clarify that the WG scope will explore how DIDs enable
access/id mgmt

Issue: https://github.com/w3c-ccg/did-wg-charter/issues/18
PR: https://github.com/w3c-ccg/did-wg-charter/pull/25
Description: Ambiguous language: "more secure protocol; the word "more" is
unneeded

Issue: https://github.com/w3c-ccg/did-wg-charter/issues/19
PR: https://github.com/w3c-ccg/did-wg-charter/pull/26
Description: Clarify that VCs are not meant to be a restrictive use case

On Sat, May 11, 2019 at 12:34 PM Kim Hamilton <kimdhamilton@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Hey folks,
> Joe and Christopher advised that these changes are so trivial that we
> should just send an email, then quickly chat about it during the action
> item section of the next CCG call. In other words, no need for PR-by-PR
> review during a call for these.
>
> Thanks,
> Kim
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ---------
> From: Kim Hamilton <kimdhamilton@gmail.com>
> Date: Sat, May 11, 2019 at 12:31 PM
> Subject: DID WG Charter -- Editorial PRs
> To: W3C Credentials CG (Public List) <public-credentials@w3.org>
>
>
> Hello folks,
> I worked with Dan (Burnett), Drummond, and Manu to identify DID WG Charter
> issues that, in our opinion, result simply from poor wording choices. The
> changes are editorial and _should_ be non-controversial. However, I wanted
> to flag these proposed changes to the group so that anyone interested has a
> chance to review.
>
> This email will serve as a 1-week notice for review; if you have any
> concerns, please respond to the github issue/PR as appropriate, or reply to
> this email if github is inconvenient for you to use.
>
> The issues I'm referring to are listed in the table below, and attached as
> a csv file.
>
> Thanks,
> Kim
>
> *Github Issue*
>
> *Proposed resolution*
>
> *Brief description of issue*
>
> *https://github.com/w3c-ccg/did-wg-charter/issues/5*
> <https://github.com/w3c-ccg/did-wg-charter/issues/5>
>
> *https://github.com/w3c-ccg/did-wg-charter/pull/6*
> <https://github.com/w3c-ccg/did-wg-charter/pull/6>
>
> DID charter needs to include defining the scheme itself
>
> *https://github.com/w3c-ccg/did-wg-charter/issues/9*
> <https://github.com/w3c-ccg/did-wg-charter/issues/9>
>
> *https://github.com/w3c-ccg/did-wg-charter/pull/24*
> <https://github.com/w3c-ccg/did-wg-charter/pull/24>
>
> Clarify that working set of DID use cases will be used as input to the DID
> WG, but they are not meant to be the definitive list. I.e. the WG will
> continue to iterate on use cases.
>
> *https://github.com/w3c-ccg/did-wg-charter/issues/15*
> <https://github.com/w3c-ccg/did-wg-charter/issues/15>
>
> *https://github.com/w3c-ccg/did-wg-charter/pull/30*
> <https://github.com/w3c-ccg/did-wg-charter/pull/30>
>
> Clarify that the WG scope will explore how DIDs enable access/id mgmt
>
> *https://github.com/w3c-ccg/did-wg-charter/issues/18*
> <https://github.com/w3c-ccg/did-wg-charter/issues/18>
>
> *https://github.com/w3c-ccg/did-wg-charter/pull/25*
> <https://github.com/w3c-ccg/did-wg-charter/pull/25>
>
> Ambiguous language: "more secure protocol"; the word "more" is unneeded
>
> *https://github.com/w3c-ccg/did-wg-charter/issues/19*
> <https://github.com/w3c-ccg/did-wg-charter/issues/19>
>
> *https://github.com/w3c-ccg/did-wg-charter/pull/26*
> <https://github.com/w3c-ccg/did-wg-charter/pull/26>
>
> Clarify that VCs are not meant to be a restrictive use case
>

On Sat, May 11, 2019 at 12:31 PM Kim Hamilton <kimdhamilton@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Hello folks,
> I worked with Dan (Burnett), Drummond, and Manu to identify DID WG Charter
> issues that, in our opinion, result simply from poor wording choices. The
> changes are editorial and _should_ be non-controversial. However, I wanted
> to flag these proposed changes to the group so that anyone interested has a
> chance to review.
>
> This email will serve as a 1-week notice for review; if you have any
> concerns, please respond to the github issue/PR as appropriate, or reply to
> this email if github is inconvenient for you to use.
>
> The issues I'm referring to are listed in the table below, and attached as
> a csv file.
>
> Thanks,
> Kim
>
> *Github Issue*
>
> *Proposed resolution*
>
> *Brief description of issue*
>
> *https://github.com/w3c-ccg/did-wg-charter/issues/5*
> <https://github.com/w3c-ccg/did-wg-charter/issues/5>
>
> *https://github.com/w3c-ccg/did-wg-charter/pull/6*
> <https://github.com/w3c-ccg/did-wg-charter/pull/6>
>
> DID charter needs to include defining the scheme itself
>
> *https://github.com/w3c-ccg/did-wg-charter/issues/9*
> <https://github.com/w3c-ccg/did-wg-charter/issues/9>
>
> *https://github.com/w3c-ccg/did-wg-charter/pull/24*
> <https://github.com/w3c-ccg/did-wg-charter/pull/24>
>
> Clarify that working set of DID use cases will be used as input to the DID
> WG, but they are not meant to be the definitive list. I.e. the WG will
> continue to iterate on use cases.
>
> *https://github.com/w3c-ccg/did-wg-charter/issues/15*
> <https://github.com/w3c-ccg/did-wg-charter/issues/15>
>
> *https://github.com/w3c-ccg/did-wg-charter/pull/30*
> <https://github.com/w3c-ccg/did-wg-charter/pull/30>
>
> Clarify that the WG scope will explore how DIDs enable access/id mgmt
>
> *https://github.com/w3c-ccg/did-wg-charter/issues/18*
> <https://github.com/w3c-ccg/did-wg-charter/issues/18>
>
> *https://github.com/w3c-ccg/did-wg-charter/pull/25*
> <https://github.com/w3c-ccg/did-wg-charter/pull/25>
>
> Ambiguous language: "more secure protocol"; the word "more" is unneeded
>
> *https://github.com/w3c-ccg/did-wg-charter/issues/19*
> <https://github.com/w3c-ccg/did-wg-charter/issues/19>
>
> *https://github.com/w3c-ccg/did-wg-charter/pull/26*
> <https://github.com/w3c-ccg/did-wg-charter/pull/26>
>
> Clarify that VCs are not meant to be a restrictive use case
>