Re: [PROPOSED WORK ITEM] Vaccination Certificate Vocabulary

Thinking about it 

Isn’t it FAR more likely that the verifier has internet access (because they are standing in a coverage area) but has no smart phone (because it needs charging or is misplaced). I’m constantly running out of power or leaving my phone in the car/office/house. Same would be true in the developing world.  Therefore equity is served by making sure that both sides can just use paper - with digital verification happening later.  “Thanks, let me take a copy of your certificate,  it looks real and I can see that the name on the cert is the same as the name on your drivers license - but I’ll verify it later when I find / charge my phone”.. 

Steven Capell
Mob: 0410 437854

> On 19 Feb 2021, at 6:07 am, Steve Capell <steve.capell@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Thank you all for your answers 
> 
> Just to be clear, I wasn’t questioning the need for holders to have paper credentials.  100% agree with that.  Huge numbers of people don’t have smart devices.  Sometimes I wish I didn’t have one either..
> 
> The question was about verifiers.  As a holder of a paper cert, I usually am asked to present it to some kind of authority or institution (border, transport, agency, bank, etc) in order to complete some transaction.  It is much less common for the verifier not to have access even in the developing world. They still need a smart phone to read the QR in any case. I take the point about power outages.  But then a few hours after the outage my battery would be dead anyway.  Typically the default in this situation is that the verifier will just inspect the paper, maybe jot down the key details to verify later.  In that scenario, as a verifier (without a working smart phone), I need to see the actual data on the paper because my brain can’t parse the QR.
> 
> Steven Capell
> Mob: 0410 437854
> 
>>> On 19 Feb 2021, at 4:23 am, Adrian Gropper <agropper@healthurl.com> wrote:
>>> 
>> 
>> To provide equity and access, we should be offering everyone a baseline service like India does with IndiaStack. Once people have a right to a secure on-line document store they control, the issue of access to mobile devices and people like children and elders that need guardians will no longer be an issue.
>> 
>> The cost of an on-line secure wallet would be trivial if we see it as a commodity and a human right. It's inevitable. We're just wasting time and lives.
>> 
>> Adrian
>> 
>>> On Thu, Feb 18, 2021 at 12:06 PM Scott Gallant <scott@scottgallant.com> wrote:
>>> in my delay... 
>>> 
>>> @Jim wrote... "we’re forming a working group on verifiable credentials and equity." 
>>>  
>>> ...very nice
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> On Thu, Feb 18, 2021 at 11:49 AM Scott Gallant <scott@scottgallant.com> wrote:
>>>> The struggle is real. I need help/solution for the intermittent/offline in island nations (even innovative ones with national id systems in flight, etc) with successful VC early use cases forImmigrations/Customs and Health testing/vax proofs. Note also these are at known main-stream experiences/transactions and I have creds/assertions to render based on softer triggers of time, movement, and behavior at a very local level outside party-party transaction that require local processing standards. Context switching, caching, syncing required along with added controls for in-person-proofing, etc which, once a party pops back online enhance the trust model with new creds itself. At a business level, we've had to scale our Health Threat Response offerings to optionally include expanded wifi/satellite/telco solutions- but that shoudln't be the only answer.
>>>> 
>>>> Vaccination Cred points to serve infectious disease... always on the top ten list of world Health Threats. Right next to it on that list are Access & Equity in care. Thus... should other pointed VC standards isolate/attack this top down in addition to it being a core part of 'Society' above? 
>>>> 
>>>> -Scott
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> On Thu, Feb 18, 2021 at 10:38 AM John, Anil <anil.john@hq.dhs.gov> wrote:
>>>>> Very much agree.
>>>>> 
>>>>>  
>>>>> 
>>>>> As an FYI, our internal rationale for why we are on this public journey in the DID/VC ecosystem has multiple components:
>>>>> 
>>>>>  
>>>>> 
>>>>> Technical ~ Need for systems and services that are resilient, self-healing, and can operate under duress in a world where perimeter-based security is no longer enough.
>>>>> Business ~ Prevent development of “walled gardens” or closed technology platforms that do not support common standards for security, privacy, and data exchange.
>>>>> Society ~ Remove limits on the growth and availability of a competitive marketplace of diverse, interoperable solutions for government and industry to draw upon to deliver cost effective and innovative solutions that are in the public interest.
>>>>>  
>>>>> 
>>>>> The “ … in the public interest” bit REQUIRES us to deliberately, consistently and with discipline focus on ensuring equity and access. Not saying that we get it right all the time or that we succeed every time, but we try and will keep trying.
>>>>> 
>>>>>  
>>>>> 
>>>>> <step-off-my-soapbox />
>>>>> 
>>>>>  
>>>>> 
>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>> 
>>>>>  
>>>>> 
>>>>> Anil
>>>>> 
>>>>>  
>>>>> 
>>>>>  
>>>>> 
>>>>> From: Leonard Rosenthol <lrosenth@adobe.com> 
>>>>> Sent: Thursday, February 18, 2021 9:56 AM
>>>>> To: John, Anil <anil.john@hq.dhs.gov>; W3C Credentials CG <public-credentials@w3.org>
>>>>> Subject: Re: [PROPOSED WORK ITEM] Vaccination Certificate Vocabulary
>>>>> 
>>>>>  
>>>>> 
>>>>> CAUTION: This email originated from outside of DHS. DO NOT click links or open attachments unless you recognize and/or trust the sender. Contact your component SOC with questions or concerns.
>>>>> 
>>>>>  
>>>>> 
>>>>> >The use case is to ensure equity and access … Globally, and not just in the fully connected world.
>>>>> 
>>>>>  
>>>>> 
>>>>> And this needs to be true for *EVERYTHING* we design and build – not just this project.   
>>>>> 
>>>>>  
>>>>> 
>>>>> Leonard
>>>>> 
>>>>>  
>>>>> 
>>>>> From: "John, Anil" <anil.john@hq.dhs.gov>
>>>>> Date: Thursday, February 18, 2021 at 8:39 AM
>>>>> To: W3C Credentials CG <public-credentials@w3.org>
>>>>> Subject: RE: [PROPOSED WORK ITEM] Vaccination Certificate Vocabulary
>>>>> Resent-From: <public-credentials@w3.org>
>>>>> Resent-Date: Thursday, February 18, 2021 at 8:36 AM
>>>>> 
>>>>>  
>>>>> 
>>>>> > More generally, what is the evidence / use case metrics for offline verifiers ?
>>>>> 
>>>>>  
>>>>> 
>>>>> “offline” has nuances.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Is it never online, or is it occasionally connected over sparse or unreliable networks?
>>>>> 
>>>>> I would assume (as I don’t have ready access to data that will prove/disprove this assertion) that it is more likely to be the latter and not the former.
>>>>> 
>>>>>  
>>>>> 
>>>>> However, to answer your actual question  -
>>>>> 
>>>>>  
>>>>> 
>>>>> The use case is to ensure equity and access … Globally, and not just in the fully connected world.
>>>>> 
>>>>>  
>>>>> 
>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>> 
>>>>>  
>>>>> 
>>>>> Anil
>>>>> 
>>>>>  
>>>>> 
>>>>> Anil John
>>>>> 
>>>>> Technical Director, Silicon Valley Innovation Program
>>>>> 
>>>>> Science and Technology Directorate
>>>>> 
>>>>> US Department of Homeland Security
>>>>> 
>>>>> Washington, DC, USA
>>>>> 
>>>>>  
>>>>> 
>>>>> Email Response Time – 24 Hours
>>>>> 
>>>>>  
>>>>> 
>>>>> <image001.png>
>>>>>