- From: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
- Date: Sat, 16 Nov 2019 17:13:24 -0500
- To: "Michael Herman (Parallelspace)" <mwherman@parallelspace.net>
- Cc: Daniel Buchner <daniel.buchner@microsoft.com>, Sam Curren <telegramsam@gmail.com>, "aries@lists.hyperledger.org" <aries@lists.hyperledger.org>, "indy@lists.hyperledger.org" <indy@lists.hyperledger.org>, Rouven Heck <rouven.heck@consensys.net>, W3C Credentials CG <public-credentials@w3.org>, Tobias Looker <tobias.looker@mattr.global>, Daniel Hardman <daniel.hardman@evernym.com>, Orie Steele <orie@transmute.industries>, Dmitri Zagidulin <dzagidulin@gmail.com>
Getting more concrete, this is only a suggestion on what seems like it might work given the collaboration conversations I've had with folks over the last 3 months between DIF, Aries, and W3C CCG. Using the template in the previous email... The communities involved in this discussion have decided to collaborate on a specification for a foundational layer for personal data stores, specifically a data model, syntax, and minimum viable HTTP-based protocol. The intent is to eventually standardize the work at W3C under W3C's Royalty-Free Patent policy. The Identity Hubs and Encrypted Data Vaults documents will be used as use case, requirements, and technical input for the collaborative effort. Regular calls will be hosted under the W3C Credentials Community Group under the aforementioned IPR policy. Each community contributing work to the effort can, at any time, withdraw from the effort and/or continue work on their draft. Given the above, it's important to understand what's not included in the work and why we're not including it yet. * The protocol work is higher-level, adjacent to VCs and DIDs, and scoped to HTTP, making W3C a natural place for that part of the work to happen. Other protocol work, like communication over DIDComm, Bluetooth, CoAP, etc. should continue to be incubated at DIF and Aries. * There is no mention of stuff like authentication, notifications, or replication. That work may happen in parallel in all three groups, it's too early to tell. We're going to try to abstract those layers in a way that doesn't cause us to have to make that particular decision on where that work should happen now. * There is no assertion that work should stop elsewhere. The DIF Identity Hubs folks should feel free to keep moving their spec forward. For example, protocols running over Bluetooth, CoAP, etc. Advanced replication protocols may also need to be moved forward in parallel and that shouldn't be blocked by this work. This only works if people feel free to walk and stay at the table because their problem is being solved... that is, the collaboration is generating value for everyone involved. Will we all be able to agree on everything above? Probably not. Will there be principled objections to what's laid out above? I don't know, that's why we're having the call. Will we be able to get enough momentum during the call to get to consensus, even if the plan isn't perfect? I hope so. -- manu -- Manu Sporny (skype: msporny, twitter: manusporny) Founder/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc. blog: Veres One Decentralized Identifier Blockchain Launches https://tinyurl.com/veres-one-launches
Received on Saturday, 16 November 2019 22:13:34 UTC