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

Re: W3C Credentials CG Call Tues: mobile DL deck

From: Adrian Gropper <agropper@healthurl.com>
Date: Fri, 8 Oct 2021 19:02:51 -0400
Message-ID: <CANYRo8gvOWM7vKkg=AY77nX599Rx5d8hnUaMK7K6AfWk9O2ewg@mail.gmail.com>
To: drummond.reed@evernym.com
Cc: Anders Rundgren <anders.rundgren.net@gmail.com>, Credentials Community Group <public-credentials@w3.org>, "Jim St.Clair" <jim.stclair@lumedic.io>, "dzagidulin@gmail.com" <dzagidulin@gmail.com>
What’s the link between SSI and our “design principles?

On Fri, Oct 8, 2021 at 6:56 PM Drummond Reed <drummond.reed@evernym.com>
wrote:

> I have to agree with Jim here. Whether we like them or not, the ISO mDL
> specs are a reality we have to deal with. And as I think the presentation
> of the UL team shows (I wasn't able to attend the CCG edition but they gave
> the same presentation to the ToIP Ecosystem Foundry Working Group two weeks
> ago), they are actively seeking to figure out how to co-exist/interoperate
> with the W3C VC specs.
>
> So +1 to productive engagement that does NOT sacrifice our design
> principles.
>
> =Drummond
>
> On Fri, Oct 8, 2021 at 2:39 PM Jim St.Clair <jim.stclair@lumedic.io>
> wrote:
>
>> “As it stands, ISO collaboration seems like a good way for W3C and IETF
>> to lose our way. “
>>
>> …or get left behind. It’s up to the community to decide.
>>
>>
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>> Jim
>>
>> *_______________*
>>
>>
>>
>> *Jim St.Clair *
>>
>> Chief Trust Officer
>>
>> jim.stclair@lumedic.io | 228-273-4893
>>
>> *Let’s meet to discuss patient identity exchange*:
>> https://calendly.com/jim-stclair-1
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* Adrian Gropper <agropper@healthurl.com>
>> *Sent:* Friday, October 8, 2021 3:58 PM
>> *To:* Jim St.Clair <jim.stclair@lumedic.io>
>> *Cc:* Anders Rundgren <anders.rundgren.net@gmail.com>; Credentials
>> Community Group <public-credentials@w3.org>; dzagidulin@gmail.com
>> *Subject:* Re: W3C Credentials CG Call Tues: mobile DL deck
>>
>>
>>
>> Pay-for standards should have no role in SSI because they are
>> inaccessible to community-supported F/OSS.
>>
>>
>>
>> IEEE has tried to split this baby with their privacy-inflected 7000
>> series. It’s a potential solution for ISO. As it stands, ISO collaboration
>> seems like a good way for W3C and IETF to lose our way.
>>
>>
>>
>> - Adrian
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 8, 2021 at 3:11 PM Jim St.Clair <jim.stclair@lumedic.io>
>> wrote:
>>
>> “+100
>> Pay-for-standards was a great idea..twenty years ago.”
>>
>> …yeah, except we’re sitting here realizing our standard is being
>> displaced by this new standard using the 20 year old model, so….
>>
>>
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>> Jim
>>
>> *_______________*
>>
>>
>>
>> *Jim St.Clair *
>>
>> Chief Trust Officer
>>
>> jim.stclair@lumedic.io | 228-273-4893
>>
>> *Let’s meet to discuss patient identity exchange*:
>> https://calendly.com/jim-stclair-1
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> *From:* Anders Rundgren <anders.rundgren.net@gmail.com>
>> *Sent:* Friday, October 8, 2021 1:00:12 PM
>> *To:* dzagidulin@gmail.com <dzagidulin@gmail.com>; Credentials Community
>> Group <public-credentials@w3.org>
>> *Subject:* Re: W3C Credentials CG Call Tues: mobile DL deck
>>
>>
>>
>> CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not
>> click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know
>> the content is safe.
>>
>>
>> On 2021-10-08 19:46, Dmitri Zagidulin wrote:
>> > David Chadwick wrote:
>> >
>> >  > At the same time I advised the W3C VC WG about mDL and suggested
>> that we could utilise their well developed protocols as we had none. But
>> again that request fell on deaf ears.
>> >
>> > I suspect part of the issue here is just culture clash. All of us (most
>> of us?) want as much wide interop as possible, and to respect prior art.
>> However, for any given W3C WG member, the idea of paying $200 or whatever
>> it is to just LOOK at the ISO spec... that's a hard sell.
>>
>> +100
>> Pay-for-standards was a great idea..twenty years ago.
>>
>> Anders
>>
>> > Dmitri
>>
>>
>>

image001.png
(image/png attachment: image001.png)

Received on Friday, 8 October 2021 23:03:15 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 8 October 2021 23:03:16 UTC