W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-credentials@w3.org > August 2021

Re: What are VCs similar to?

From: Adrian Gropper <agropper@healthurl.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2021 10:24:04 -0400
Message-ID: <CANYRo8iztTAxbB=jgnX1_AfYhauEujG8u3_iBQAqFW81V+h7hg@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Phillip D. Long" <phil@rhzconsulting.com>
Cc: Henry Story <henry.story@gmail.com>, "Michael Herman (Trusted Digital Web)" <mwherman@parallelspace.net>, Steve Capell <steve.capell@gmail.com>, "public-credentials (public-credentials@w3.org)" <public-credentials@w3.org>
Hi Phil,

VCs are a standard data model under control of W3C. Have you considered
that the external (across a trust boundary) protocols associated with VCs
(and DIDs) should be standardized independently of W3C, ideally in IETF?

- Adrian

On Mon, Aug 23, 2021 at 10:11 AM Phillip D. Long <phil@rhzconsulting.com>
wrote:

> Steve et. al. - You’re right that the non-techie audience, who are savvy
> about many things, just not the tech space, do have trouble seeing the
> value proposition afforded by VCs. In part that’s because it has never been
> possible before to have a trustable assertion without doing the background
> checking. Hence, the costs associated with that process are largely built
> into existing business models. Change business practices is itself costly,
> even if it delivers savings after implementation is achieved. And it opens
> up other possibilities for rethinking the verification process for other
> practices which will be ’new’ to most.
>
> A team lead by the Learning Economy Foundation, of which I’m a part, has
> some funding to look at the protocol and standards landscape of the VC
> ecosystem specifically with the intention of building a visual of the
> landscape and then a layman’s guide to the status of the relevant protocols
> with, hopefully, some recommendations for the place to start with VCs for
> basic use cases such as issuing a certificate for completion of a
> credential (education/training). Or, to create self-asserted skills that
> can be endorsed through the VC native Open Badge VC that this group heard
> Kerri Lemoie present a month or so ago.
>
> We could use any advice, suggestions and feedback on the emerging protocol
> landscape for issuing and presenting VCs. We’d be happy to share what we
> gather for feedback and suggestions after our first phase of data
> collection (a limited survey) is reviewed and summarized.
>
> I like the passport chip analogy, as well!
>
> Cheers,
>  Phil
>
> *Phillip Long, Ph.D*.,
> T3 Innovation Network, LER Pilot Projects Community Manager
> e:  <phil@rhzconsulting.com>phil@rhzconsulting.com,
> SNS: Twitter/Telegram @RadHertz
> LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/longpd
> —
> *Senior Scholar, Georgetown University*
> Center for New Designs in Learning & Scholarship (CNDLS)
> e: pl673@georgetown.edu
> —
> *Open Software Fellow*
> Concentric Sky
> e: plong@concentricsky.com
> https://concentricsky.com/  <https://www.concentricsky.com/>
> —
>
> *RHz Consulting, LLC.*Inquire-Listen-Design-Prototype-Analyze-Repeat
> e:phil@rhzconsulting.com
> LinkedIn:http://www.linkedin.com/in/longpd/
> <http://www.linkedin.com/in/longpd/>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Aug 23, 2021, at 7:10 AM, Steve Capell <steve.capell@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Also a good analogy.  Probably depends on your intended audience
>
> - a tech audience will most likely understand and appreciate the x.509
> analogy
> - but a business / policy audience will give you a blank stare if you say
> “it’s just like x.509”.  I think the passport chip is a better story for
> the non tech audience
>
> I may venture to suggest that the biggest problem I’ve faced (and probably
> this group faces) is not convincing tech savvy people - but rather getting
> business / policy people to understand the benefits to the extent that they
> will allocate budget to projects so they can realise that benefit
>
> I still struggle with this - almost every day
>
> Steven Capell
> Mob: 0410 437854
>
> On 23 Aug 2021, at 9:03 pm, Henry Story <henry.story@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> 
>
> On 23. Aug 2021, at 11:49, Michael Herman (Trusted Digital Web) <
> mwherman@parallelspace.net> wrote:
>
> If you assume a simple definition of a Verifiable Credentials platform as
> a set of data models and protocols for creating and verifying verifiable
> data packets and their exchange between 2 or more software agents (don't
> get hung up on the specific wording), what existing protocols/platform
> standards, in your mind, are the most similar to VCs (at a top-level)?
> - DNS?
> - TCP packets?
> - SOAP messages?
> - something else?
>
>
> X509 Certificates (with 40 years of tech improvements added to them).
>
> A Verifiable Claim is just a signed content, and the big leap of VC stack
> is that
> it is built on well defined, open, extensible logics.
>
> Henry
>
>
> Michael Herman
>
> Get Outlook for Android
>
>
>
>
>
>
Received on Monday, 23 August 2021 14:24:29 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Monday, 23 August 2021 14:24:31 UTC