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

Re: New Work Item Proposal: Universal Wallet 2020

From: Kaliya IDwoman <kaliya-id@identitywoman.net>
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2020 17:37:00 -0700
Message-ID: <CA+z9oKB0PXu_o2a=a_cSiqMGM6=A2h=wTiwpW5uWdhe5dc072A@mail.gmail.com>
To: Orie Steele <orie@transmute.industries>
Cc: Leonard Rosenthol <lrosenth@adobe.com>, Wayne Chang <wyc@fastmail.fm>, Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>, W3C Credentials CG <public-credentials@w3.org>
This is great work Orie,
 I think having a code base that implements the specification and stays
aligned is a good idea.
 I think it would be great to see example/reference implementations in
multiple languages.


On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 5:07 PM Orie Steele <orie@transmute.industries>
wrote:

> Everytime this comes up, I wonder why members of this community seem
> opposed to the wikipedia definition:
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reference_implementation
>
> Characteristics of a Reference Implementation:
>
>    1. Developed concurrently with the specification and test suite;
>    2. Verifies that specification is implementable;
>    3. Enables the test suite to be tested;
>    4. Serves as a Gold Standard against which other implementations can
>    be measured;
>    5. Helps to clarify the intent of the specification in situations
>    where conformance tests
>    <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conformance_testing> are inadequate
>
>
> Does W3C specifically discourage the use of the term "reference
> implementation".... I assumed this was a common practice:
> https://github.com/webofthings/webofthings.js
>
> Regardless of the name, these are the characteristics I'm looking for. As
> wikipedia notes, "sample" or "model" implementation are less
> frequently used terms for the same thing.
>
> There are some conformance tests, and I can see a lot of value in keeping
> them next to the spec and "sample implementation", I'm generally a fan of
> starting with a mono repo and splitting things up when it becomes obvious
> that it is the right thing to do because there is too much contribution for
> one repo to handle, or because sub components are getting consumed
> independently almost as frequently as they are getting consumed together.
>
> If there is reason to believe there will be more contribution overall if
> the "sample implementation" is also in W3C CCG repos, I'm happy to do
> that... I saw splitting them up as a potential opportunity to
> engage multiple communities and AFAIK you can contribute to Apache 2.0
> software regardless of the github organization that hosts it, for example:
> https://github.com/adobe/experience-platform-dsw-reference is also Apache
> 2.0 with a CLA...
>
> Leonard, should I interpret your strong desire that "an example
> implementation" stay in CCG as an indication of a strong desire / plan to
> contribute to it here?
>
> OS
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 5:23 PM Leonard Rosenthol <lrosenth@adobe.com>
> wrote:
>
>> "Reference Implementation" means that it is the "blessed/approved "
>> implementation which implements 100% of a specification to the agreement of
>> all parties involved.
>>
>> "Conforming" implies that (a) the specification has normative
>> requirements to which the software can conform and that (b) someone(s) have
>> all agreed that it meets 100% of the requirements.
>>
>> Example implementation is probably best.
>>
>> Leonard
>>
>> ´╗┐On 6/24/20, 4:47 PM, "Wayne Chang" <wyc@fastmail.fm> wrote:
>>
>>     Manu, could you please elaborate on your concerns about calling
>> certain code a "reference implementation"? What drawbacks are there, and
>> what else could we call it? "Example implementation"? "Conforming
>> implementation"?
>>
>>     On Wed, Jun 24, 2020, at 4:26 PM, Manu Sporny wrote:
>>     > On 6/24/20 3:31 PM, Orie Steele wrote:
>>     > > We're looking for additional organizations to co-edit / sponsor
>> the
>>     > > development of the specification in the W3C CCG.
>>     >
>>     > Digital Bazaar is supportive of this specification and hosting it
>> in the
>>     > W3C CCG.
>>     >
>>     > We have no strong opinion on hosting an implementation at DIF as
>> long as
>>     > doing so wouldn't create IPR issues that would restrict anyone from
>>     > contributing to the work. We continue to be skeptical of calling it
>> a
>>     > "reference implementation".
>>     >
>>     > While we do not have the spare cycles to be a co-editor on the
>>     > specification, we do expect to be heavily involved in discussion
>> related
>>     > to the specification as we expect that the outcome will have a
>> direct
>>     > impact on our product offerings.
>>     >
>>     > Finally, thank you to Orie, Margo, and Guillaume from Transmute for
>>     > putting this together and kicking off the work. It's a critical
>> piece
>>     > that the industry will need in order to interoperate at the
>> application
>>     > layer.
>>     >
>>     > -- manu
>>     >
>>     > --
>>     > Manu Sporny -
>> https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.linkedin.com%2Fin%2Fmanusporny%2F&amp;data=02%7C01%7Clrosenth%40adobe.com%7C54db72b34f034e36a6cb08d8187fbe4f%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637286284216262630&amp;sdata=nGVOqadvTWe01uCzQIDa715%2BpTZeqEouewEEF9aXYoA%3D&amp;reserved=0
>>     > Founder/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc.
>>     > blog: Veres One Decentralized Identifier Blockchain Launches
>>     >
>> https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Ftinyurl.com%2Fveres-one-launches&amp;data=02%7C01%7Clrosenth%40adobe.com%7C54db72b34f034e36a6cb08d8187fbe4f%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637286284216262630&amp;sdata=u%2F66e1Uy8HbOvk58Sf3i8RsUKFzdpltLbtSxsNaXnVI%3D&amp;reserved=0
>>     >
>>     >
>>
>>
>>
>
> --
> *ORIE STEELE*
> Chief Technical Officer
> www.transmute.industries
>
> <https://www.transmute.industries>
>
Received on Thursday, 25 June 2020 00:37:24 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thursday, 25 June 2020 00:37:25 UTC