W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-credentials@w3.org > April 2020

Re: Please vote to approve/disapprove the new charter

From: Daniel Hardman <daniel.hardman@evernym.com>
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 2020 08:31:09 -0600
Message-ID: <CAFBYrUp7rR+oN6pLjsOAM0MV7Y+uaaDVfU1ydaOVgywORFH+Og@mail.gmail.com>
To: Kim Hamilton <kimdhamilton@gmail.com>
Cc: "W3C Credentials CG (Public List)" <public-credentials@w3.org>, Christopher Allen <ChristopherA@lifewithalacrity.com>, Joe Andrieu <joe@legreq.com>
Should we understand by this that presenting credentials via QR code, via
BlueTooth/NFC, via sneakernet, and so forth is out of scope?

The charter language describes scope using these phrases:

"Our tasks include drafting and incubating Internet specifications"
"In general, the topics that are “out of scope” involve anything not
directly related to enabling interoperable credentials on the Web."


Part of the source of friction between Hyperledger Indy/Aries and the CCG
is the CCG's insistence on a web focus, where the HL world has always
wanted a broader remit. When the CCG announced issuer and verifier API
initiatives, it was with a web mindset, despite my pleadings to think
broader than HTTP. Etc. Perhaps this is unavoidable, given the CCG's parent
org?

I am happy to vote in favor of the current charter; I just felt it was
worth pointing out that the language perpetuates an assumption about
narrowness of approach, and that the CCG shouldn't be upset if people go
elsewhere to be broad.

On Thu, Apr 9, 2020 at 9:05 PM Kim Hamilton <kimdhamilton@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hello all,
> Following up on Tuesday's CCG call, the chairs proposed we adopt the new
> charter and updates process
> <https://docs.google.com/document/d/15_7noTaKsqN-TBR7VgECpy-H-zS05rNds81GyRw95jE/edit#heading=h.9fyeyfch5770>.
> This must be adopted following the process in the current charter, which
> requires a 30-day voting period and 2/3 of votes cast signaling approval[1]
>
> *Action requested*: We request that you signal your approval/disapproval
> by responding to this email with "approve" or "disapprove", and then feel
> free to promptly mute this thread, which may get noisy.
>
> Thanks,
> Kim on behalf of chairs
>
> [1] see "Amendments to this Charter"
> https://www.w3.org/community/credentials/charter-20140808/. Relevant
> excerpt:
>
> The group can decide to work on a proposed amended charter, editing the
> text using the Decision Process described above. The decision on whether to
> adopt the amended charter is made by conducting a 30-day vote on the
> proposed new charter. The new charter, if approved, takes effect on either
> the proposed date in the charter itself, or 7 days after the result of the
> election is announced, whichever is later. A new charter must receive 2/3
> of the votes cast in the approval vote to pass. The group may make simple
> corrections to the charter such as deliverable dates by the simpler group
> decision process rather than this charter amendment process.
>
Received on Friday, 10 April 2020 14:31:35 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thursday, 24 March 2022 20:24:58 UTC