- From: Charles E. Lehner <charles.lehner@spruceid.com>
- Date: Sun, 18 Apr 2021 09:37:43 -0400
- To: W3C Credentials CG <public-credentials@w3.org>
Dear CCG, I shared on the Secure Scuttlebutt Network about the upcoming "Intro to VCs in Supply Chain" and about the Traceability Vocab. Bob Haugen from Mikorizal Software responded with a question: > Looks to me like they are focusing on properties of > products-to-be-traced, possibly so the actual tracing does not need > to be done? Or not? > > Whereas Valueflows (and my previous experience in actual food supply > chains) focus on tracing backward through the recorded material > flows. https://valueflo.ws/appendix/track.html > > So if you had verifiable credentials of eg some food that was > poisoned (eg e. coli contamination), that fact would most likely be > verified (if at all) only at the point where the poison was > discovered, but not to the source of the contamination (feeding > animal body parts to other animals) which would most likely not have > been verified even then. But by tracing back to the source CAFO > (Confined Animal Feeding Operation) and in some cases source animal, > the cause might be determined, and then the destinations of the other > cuts of the same contaminated animal, or all animals from that CAFO, > could be found for a recall. > > The US Food and Drug Administration (and I expect similar > institutions in other countries) require all of those tracking and > tracing records to be preserved and available for reporting. The > tracking and tracing processes are then something like a web crawl > through links from one event to the previous or next events.s. > [...] But this would be an active issue for us if and only if we > are working with a network that wants to use VCs. > > P.S. my example above was a bit misleading. For feeding animal body > parts to other animals, the problem would be mad cow disease (chronic > wasting disease, or prions), and not e. coli. Would anyone have an answer or reference I could pass on to Bob? Or might this be addressed in the 101? Thanks, Charles
Received on Sunday, 18 April 2021 13:38:58 UTC