W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-credentials@w3.org > August 2022

[MINUTES] W3C CCG Credentials CG Call - 2022-08-02

From: CCG Minutes Bot <minutes@w3c-ccg.org>
Date: Wed, 03 Aug 2022 10:29:36 +0000
Message-ID: <E1oJBd7-007vZF-DI@mimas.w3.org>
Thanks to Our Robot Overlords for scribing this week!

The transcript for the call is now available here:

https://w3c-ccg.github.io/meetings/2022-08-02-traceability/

Full text of the discussion follows for W3C archival purposes.
Audio of the meeting is available at the following location:

https://w3c-ccg.github.io/meetings/2022-08-02-traceability/audio.ogg

----------------------------------------------------------------
Verifiable Traceability Task Force Transcript for 2022-08-02

Agenda:
  https://www.w3.org/Search/Mail/Public/advanced_search?hdr-1-name=subject&hdr-1-query=%5BAGENDA&period_month=Aug&period_year=2022&index-grp=Public__FULL&index-type=t&type-index=public-credentials&resultsperpage=20&sortby=date
Organizer:
  Orie Steele, Mike Prorock, Mahmoud Alkhraishi
Scribe:
  Our Robot Overlords
Present:
  Mike Prorock, Khalid Gobin, Orie Steele, nis, Ben - Transmute, 
  Russell Hofvendahl (mesur.io), Vivien, TallTed // Ted Thibodeau 
  (he/him) (OpenLinkSw.com), Ted Thibodeau

Our Robot Overlords are scribing.
Khalid_Gobin: Yeah for sure my name is Khalid I am a software 
  developer internet May vinet and it's nice to be working with all 
  of you.
Mike Prorock:  All all detours briefly Chris has actually gone 
  this week so kudos to him for actually leaving like the front of 
  his computer the but we Orient have been talking for a little 
  while about doing like a walkthrough of how do what are best 
  practices and really start to finish like json-ld for 
  vocabularies because there.
Mike Prorock:   Kind of some specific things there.
Mike Prorock:  I think unless or he's going to be out of office 
  to we should try to do that during the trace called next week and 
  if so because that way I think most people will be out of 
  vacation time and here and stuff like that I just wanted to make 
  sure like we had as many people as possible around for that any 
  quick feedback anyone from either the transmute may have Annette 
  said anyone could be out next week or anything like that that we 
  should think about before we schedule anything like that.
Mike Prorock:   And I'm.
Mike Prorock:  Silence is like I can send an email to the list 
  that we're going to do that so.
<tallted> fwiw I expect to be here next week
Mike Prorock:  Great all right I'll send an email to the list to 
  that effect so cool that was the only detour I think I aside from 
  Ori since you and I spent last week having our brains full of 
  things anything you want to note for my ETF that's relevant to 
  this group just while we're here as a group or anything.
Orie Steele:  I think that there is continued interest in the 
  house E & Cozy representations for verifiable credentials so if 
  you're not currently capable of issuing credentials and those 
  formats you can consider whether or not you want to issue 
  credentials in those formats we have some tests that cover some 
  of that and I see.
Orie Steele:  Posie & Cozy formatted verifiable credentials will 
  change so I also understand if you don't want to implement them 
  just yet because you know they're going to change that's really 
  all I have to say about that.
Mike Prorock:  Yeah yeah I will note that that seemed to be a 
  running theme that I was encountering in a lot of different 
  context but especially on things related to supply chain and ITF 
  so so you aware if you're working on stats issuing and verifying 
  credentials You Know bethink Thee for sure thinking about the 
  future right and especially binary type stuff is we look at some 
  volumes of data so and I think.
Mike Prorock:  That's probably the last.
Mike Prorock:  Detour and less.
Mike Prorock:  What else has anything.
https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-vocab/pulls
https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-vocab/pull/503
Russell_Hofvendahl_(mesur.io): Hey I think that was me.
Russell_Hofvendahl_(mesur.io): No problem so this the biggest you 
  last time was that I wasn't clear enough on this to provide a 
  good explanation of why it was needed thank you Mike for 
  elaborating on that the only other than that the only change is 
  as requested how the value with multiple possible types handled.
Mike Prorock:  And I queued up because I can talk to this a 
  little bit because it's yeah it's a bit of a weird one and Ted 
  and I think the initial read that I think both said and everyone 
  else had and it was my initial read when presented with this by 
  customer was that why right and what it actually boils down to is 
  that we have a couple of customers and we're able to test you 
  know throwing some.
Mike Prorock:   Any kind of data their way just to see how they.
Mike Prorock:  To adjust it they wanted a very sad way to say 
  that here is this programmatic way to make a labeled you know the 
  thing with some external reference number that they handle 
  separately in their system right it's totally blind to anything 
  going on with the Trade Center on stuff that then correlates that 
  label in their system with some external value and and the.
Mike Prorock:   Kind of.
Mike Prorock:  They like the easy example to think of is where 
  you have a customer that needs to reference for instance an 
  external database identifier in some third party system that 
  there is a pre-arranged you know rule set between the two parties 
  the up I can send you this data and you know what to do with it 
  in your system knows how to programmatically interpret something 
  you got to credential of this type and you then have this 
  business logic that steps in and says.
Mike Prorock:  I've got a rule.
Mike Prorock:  You know have in there and then based on that I'm 
  going to go step down some other business logic somewhere and so 
  rather than just saying oh yeah just make a claim and call it 
  whatever you want that made people very very nervous right just 
  exploiting the actual default behavior of VCS they actually 
  wanted some names attached to it and also one of the type 
  assigned to the like a defined type for this kind of icky bear 
  effectively.
Mike Prorock:   You know key value pair so that they could 
  intercepted.
Mike Prorock:  Handle it appropriately that may or may not have 
  triggered some questions from folks in the group not sure so.
Mike Prorock:  It's a loaded term yeah exactly.
<orie> This PR is a disaster
Mike Prorock:  Yeah well in in in a totally alternate path and I 
  lost a language that they request because they effectively we're 
  going after third party you know a very programmatic way of 
  referencing third-party literal claims you know like here's an 
  idea to go look up this additional data that will never make its 
  way over here right you know the you know I think the terminology 
  itself.
Russell_Hofvendahl_(mesur.io): Terminology was it would be easy 
  just to rename this third-party claim so it's less ambiguous.
Mike Prorock:  You know I would you know that or external value 
  right or something like that right so you know or keep are 
  credential write something like that key value pair and it's just 
  a very verbose way of basically saying there's key value pair 
  that we explicitly know is going to reference some external 
  system that's the goal right so we can bike shed the terminology 
  our we want but that's what they actually.
<orie> I feel like you don't undersand what JSON-LD is.
TallTed_//_Ted_Thibodeau_(he/him)_(OpenLinkSw.com): I think this 
  needs to be an issue before it becomes a PR I don't think that 
  it's flushed out nearly enough to understanding either what these 
  end users want or how the best way to handle that is first we 
  really do have to be clear on what they need and how it is not 
  addressed by what we've already got.
TallTed_//_Ted_Thibodeau_(he/him)_(OpenLinkSw.com): And we can 
  hammer on what's the best way to deliver that thing that we don't 
  already have.
TallTed_//_Ted_Thibodeau_(he/him)_(OpenLinkSw.com): Because it's 
  been discussed a bit and apparently not fully understood also 
  want to talk about how claims became credentials verifiable 
  claims to The uninitiated Listener and also to an awful lot of 
  initiated listeners suggest that the statement IE the claim.
TallTed_//_Ted_Thibodeau_(he/him)_(OpenLinkSw.com): Itself is 
  verifiable so that you can confirm the factual nature of what is 
  being stated and that is not what's going on.
TallTed_//_Ted_Thibodeau_(he/him)_(OpenLinkSw.com): Verifiable 
  credentials what is verifiable is that the issuer said these 
  things made these claims.
<orie> TLDR, read the spec: 
  https://www.w3.org/TR/vc-data-model/#claims
TallTed_//_Ted_Thibodeau_(he/him)_(OpenLinkSw.com): There's 
  nothing about their validity their accuracy anything like that 
  it's only that Joe said that Frank is in the park that's it Frank 
  may not be in the park.
TallTed_//_Ted_Thibodeau_(he/him)_(OpenLinkSw.com): May not be a 
  park at all Frank may not exist.
TallTed_//_Ted_Thibodeau_(he/him)_(OpenLinkSw.com): But we know 
  that Joe said that thing that's it.
TallTed_//_Ted_Thibodeau_(he/him)_(OpenLinkSw.com): And that 
  being the case.
TallTed_//_Ted_Thibodeau_(he/him)_(OpenLinkSw.com): Not sure that 
  this customer wish this end-user wish is.
TallTed_//_Ted_Thibodeau_(he/him)_(OpenLinkSw.com): That's it for 
  now.
Orie Steele:  Yeah I mean I think we have some building blocks 
  which were extending here and I think the challenge that I have 
  with this pull request is it's Reinventing the building blocks 
  that were using so from a data modeling perspective if we say you 
  know json-ld and semantic data modeling that requirement we have 
  a spec that defines sin.
Orie Steele:   Tax for that and this.
Orie Steele:  Using that existing syntax again to Define that 
  existing syntax just it seems to miss the point of verifiable 
  credentials or Json I'll be generally I think the if the 
  customer's request is I want a way to have key value pairs that 
  are unique or in some structured format good news is that json-ld 
  handles that really really well and I don't know that you 
  necessarily need.
Orie Steele:   To do anything.
Orie Steele:  Much more in order to accomplish that like the type 
  you know the question is you're trying to define a key value pair 
  are you trying to define a key value pair that's just a property 
  or an rdf class what which one are you trying to Define I think 
  that's that's where we should start because that's the language 
  that Jason will be uses to Define key value pairs so I think.
Orie Steele:  Should have a conversation on issues about it it's 
  possible that maybe some basic education around json-ld would 
  also help unblock the stuff a happy to do that yeah when I want 
  to understand why it is that we're Reinventing json-ld in a 
  vocabulary.
Mike Prorock:  Yeah well and it's it's more as a way of an 
  interface to people that cannot will not nor have no desire to 
  work with json-ld want to treat this stuff just as Json and want 
  a programmatic way to say hey here's this identifier I'm going to 
  give you and here's a foreign key or some other value that you 
  can use to go look that up in that thing that's it and it could 
  literally just be a key value pair like if we.
Mike Prorock:  Do your external reference or external okay said 
  like pretty flexible on the naming here but it's going to be a 
  market reality that we're going to see.
<tallted> didn't we have something like "correlation"?
Orie Steele:  So I'm cute to respond to that we are contact we 
  are.
Orie Steele:  Working on this vocabulary this is a json-ld 
  vocabulary if there's disagreement now around whether or not 
  that's what we're working on together I think we should just 
  pause and have a longer conversation around that because there is 
  ways there are ways to make json-ld sore friendlier to folks but 
  there has to be some sort of shared a green around the value of a 
  vocabulary and in the context of the work item as it's been 
  developed so far.
Orie Steele:   Far what you just said Mike is super.
Orie Steele:  I don't really know how to effectively support 
  folks who want to use a json-ld vocabulary but don't want to know 
  what json-ld is.
Ben_-_Transmute: Yeah you know for me my my kind of argument or 
  question behind this is you know if the customer wants to have 
  some key value lookup or some way to do that wouldn't you know if 
  they just have some Json interface you know that they wanted 
  program at they want to do you know could they do that outside of 
  vocabulary you know is that just a script or program that they 
  write that does this is this really something that would be 
  committed.
Ben_-_Transmute: Baseball cap or could you say you know.
Ben_-_Transmute: The scripture hears it.
Ben_-_Transmute: Your face feel free to use it outside of this.
Mike Prorock:  Maybe yes maybe no but I don't think so and for 
  one very good reason right if you think about putting a traceable 
  presentation over.
Mike Prorock:  We expect that everyone will have all of their 
  data for all systems related to all things related to a supply 
  chain or regulatory bodies Etc and this vocab and described in 
  this vocab cool then I think then it's then we don't have a 
  problem and we can kill this PR right but I think in fact I know 
  realistically there will be an onboard time and a step-by-step 
  type process and I'll give you a really good example which is 
  Organic certification.
Mike Prorock:   In the agriculture sector.
Mike Prorock:  There are folks that will want to say look I've 
  done the bare minimum to issue a VC that literally like I might 
  not even do it right like I'm doing this real bare minimum you 
  know almost hard coating it to say this you know ID you know 
  number identifying the organic search that you can come look up 
  in our system has such name attached to it and hands that to it.
Mike Prorock:  Third party who then.
Mike Prorock:  In a traceable presentation right there trusted 
  there's a there's an agreement of business logic agreement 
  between these people and a contractual agreement between these 
  orgs that's the kind of situation we're going to increasingly run 
  into as we start interfacing this stuff with the rest of the 
  world right and and there and that's the issue is how do we then 
  make it very as simple as possible to just our Bertie you know 
  all on you know when needed say yep I've got this idea it's such 
  a.
Mike Prorock:  Or such and such foreign key that exists in an 
  external system but I know enough about verifiable credentials to 
  say yeah I want to sign that piece of data right but that's it I 
  might not even know anymore than that right and I understand that 
  sure it's not ideal it's not right it's not perfect etcetera but 
  I but I think it's also practical.
TallTed_//_Ted_Thibodeau_(he/him)_(OpenLinkSw.com): It's so 
  starting from the base point that what we're building in this 
  work item in this call is a traceability vocabulary.
TallTed_//_Ted_Thibodeau_(he/him)_(OpenLinkSw.com): Is there 
  nothing in the existing vocab as we've built it that covers this 
  is question one and question two is is this something that exists 
  in the paper world that were theoretically Reinventing with this 
  vocabulary or or not so much Reinventing as standardizing we're 
  building an OE D in a sense of all the traceability forms that 
  are being used and so we need the vocabulary to.
Mike Prorock:  The paper yeah exactly yeah.
TallTed_//_Ted_Thibodeau_(he/him)_(OpenLinkSw.com): Of the 
  filament blankly and if this doesn't if this is me just as a fill 
  in this blank label then we're already going outside our remit.
Mike Prorock:  Yeah Ted there's actually a really common paper 
  example you see which is a letter that says it you know issuer I 
  so-and-so right as the issuer about this subject right this 
  person say that they have an import permit for X with 
  such-and-such number or a organic search for such number it's 
  literally that so it's precisely the use case for verifiable 
  credentials it's just the barest minimum true.
Mike Prorock:   Aimed down version of that.
<orie> I suggest you review `@id` and `@type` :)
TallTed_//_Ted_Thibodeau_(he/him)_(OpenLinkSw.com): The network 
  they should use is a barest version trimmed down verifiable 
  credential or they should attach maybe some binary exhibit to 
  this.
TallTed_//_Ted_Thibodeau_(he/him)_(OpenLinkSw.com): But that's 
  that's where we're going here is we're talking bare-bones minimum 
  and they're not willing to educate themselves about the 
  bare-bones minimum they're using if you give somebody a hammer 
  and they're not going to take the time to realize they should not 
  use it on their head that's not our problem.
Ben_-_Transmute: Yeah I could I could I think you know we might 
  kind of want to move on to an after this so basically just a 
  summary is the sounds like a like Evite this just seems like 
  mapping a key value Jason pair to arraylist and verify the 
  credentials for people who don't understand the json-ld I think 
  that.
Ben_-_Transmute:  that you know.
Ben_-_Transmute: The purpose of this project is that we're 
  defining a vocabulary in which we have structured data that can 
  be grouped and and haven't already of representation so this 
  doesn't feel like a stop Gap is much as if the claims and you 
  know in this context aren't going to be mapped to anything it 
  sounds like you could almost use at vocab and just have you know 
  terms of floating or something like that it seems it seems like 
  there could be it seems like you know a go.
Ben_-_Transmute:  cat could be abused.
<orie> `@vocab` + `@id` and `@type`.
Ben_-_Transmute: Or what do you think.
Orie Steele:  Yeah I think it's possible to do I mean there are 
  as possible to do this and have term definitions that are 
  somewhat useful it's possible to do it with term definitions that 
  are useless and it's possible to do it while saying this is 
  arbitrary Json I'm signing over it and I have no idea what it is 
  you can do all of those things.
Orie Steele:   Which of.
Orie Steele:  Things are we trying to do you know I suspect based 
  on the pull request we're trying to sign over terms that are 
  meant to be interpreted in a generic way and I think that's very 
  much achievable but my concern is that it's pulling the 
  vocabulary in a direction that maybe isn't fully thought through 
  and then the question is like well how does this approach 
  integrate with all of the work we've done up until now.
Orie Steele:   Because I think.
Orie Steele:  Could easily start like patching less and just undo 
  all of the vocabulary and go back to like signing simple key 
  value pairs in and out vocab context with arbitrary Json inside 
  of it and it might I could see a sort of like going all the way 
  back that direction I'm not in favor of doing that I think we're 
  here to create semantic Clarity and that means some extra effort 
  has to be applied and then you need a way of signaling you know.
Orie Steele:   No if you can't meet those.
Orie Steele:  Eat that semantic Clarity bar as an issuer and yet 
  you still want to issue credentials you should have a way of 
  signaling that and are we actually have that today it's what you 
  get when you just sign arbitrary Json within a vocab and you 
  don't Define your terms properly.
Mike Prorock:  I defer I kicked myself out of queue to let person 
  case he was oh yeah.
Mike Prorock:  Yeah yeah I'm going to I'm going to make a 
  fundamental Point here that I think is important which is we will 
  never go map every piece of.
Mike Prorock:  Jack related to all vocabularies because otherwise 
  we're going to do exactly the same cluster that exists for all of 
  the mess of vocabs that are already out there so one of the 
  things that I think we need to be cognizant of is do we or do we 
  not at a fundamental level want to provide some way to represent 
  a relationship between in our case a traceable presentation with 
  some third-party system in a consistent program at.
Mike Prorock:   Akin to find way so this is why I said this is a 
  terminology.
Mike Prorock:  Right you know and or you know bike shedding 
  whatever we can kill this and we can reopen up and identical 
  thing or a very similar thing but basically do we want to provide 
  in the classic example in supply chain as sap do we want to be 
  able to reference and say this issuer who runs this closed up sap 
  system makes the following Claim about a subject right you know 
  and you so we're using issuer in.
Mike Prorock:   Objects same way that they.
<tallted> have we defined this "traceable presentation"? or is 
  that just a verifiable presentation using the traceability vocab?
<orie> but this isn't a traceable presentation!
<orie> its an endorsement use case
<orie> ....
Mike Prorock:  I have some pick arbitrary x y z table and a 
  foreign key for instance right and yes Ted we have defined 
  traceable presentation it's in the vocab it's a way of attaching 
  a correlation ID to credentials that are presented together at 
  the same time and and so if yeah correct or this is not a 
  traceable presentation it's an endorsement use case that that 
  you're exactly right just following the chat.
Mike Prorock:   So how do we want to represent that.
<ben_-_transmute> i think those gaps can be filled in with 
  @vocab, i think our objective is to define richly defined 
  vocabulary for specific document-types
Mike Prorock:  That is a thing we need to provide an answer to 
  assuming that we're not going to get immediate adoption or you 
  know Etc of all things and have all database schemas Etc 
  described but want to in a semantic way be able to represent that 
  kind of foreign key relationship and I don't think yeah.
TallTed_//_Ted_Thibodeau_(he/him)_(OpenLinkSw.com): This seems 
  like this is an implementation guide this is a onboarding to the 
  modern new way of doing things this is get away from your paper 
  and get into the wire but I still don't have a solid use case 
  that is not satisfiable given the things that we already have.
TallTed_//_Ted_Thibodeau_(he/him)_(OpenLinkSw.com):  I need.
TallTed_//_Ted_Thibodeau_(he/him)_(OpenLinkSw.com): I need to 
  understand why how the things that we already have are not usable 
  for this thing I think the correlation ID is right there and that 
  correlation ID could be attached to a binary attachment it could 
  be attached to arbitrary text can be attached to anything and 
  that should deliver what is being asked for right now which is 
  semantically empty.
Orie Steele:  Mike can I take a stab at understanding your use 
  case since we were clearly stuck on must this pull request so I'm 
  a first-party issue of organic certificate for my farm so I am 
  I'm a farmer and I'm signing and certificate it says this field 
  here is organic.
Orie Steele:  Start start me with the the an issuer first issuer 
  making a claim about us.
Mike Prorock:  The first issue are in this case would be a 
  third-party regulatory body that comes in and perform something 
  and assigns an ID of some kind right so in this case it will be 
  in the use case we're talking about the actual organic certifier 
  comes in and says Ah I've got this farm and their organically 
  certified but I'm not.
Orie Steele:  Okay so let me let me back up let's start with the 
  subject what is the subject.
Mike Prorock:  In that case that would be the farm.
Orie Steele:  So the farm as an organization the entire thing 
  okay.
Mike Prorock:  Yes yeah we're some ID right reverence it did 
  right.
Orie Steele:  Right and in the first issue or making a claim 
  about that organization is what what is the issue.
Mike Prorock:  The first issue we're making the claim about that 
  the issuer would be the organic certifying body.
Orie Steele:  Okay so there's a legal entity that certifies Farms 
  are the issuer they're claiming that a specific Farm is organic.
Mike Prorock:  Yeah that's an example in organic is not a good 
  one because and the reason I'm saying organic is not a good one 
  as we can Define some basic credentials around this right but 
  there are this is really like but it's that kind of a thing where 
  yeah.
Orie Steele:  Want to understand how far beyond the issuer makes 
  claims about subject use case we have to go so if are we done and 
  we if I have an issue.
Orie Steele:  Okay so hold on.
Mike Prorock:  Over because what they need to then say is not 
  just issuer Organics it's not just organic search as the you know 
  certifying body is the issue or saying that the subject has the 
  existence of an organic thing right there at what they're 
  actually doing is they're specifying that here's an IED for a 
  type that I need you to go look up in my third party system 
  organic sir tidy whatever and the chorus.
Mike Prorock:   Clapping item.
Mike Prorock: +1 Nis
https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-vocab/pull/506
Ben_-_Transmute: For me okay I will just quickly give a short 
  introduction to this poor past this is making a few lines change 
  in regenerate that JS I realized that after the folder 
  organization that we did were now that all the credentials are in 
  one folder I can make the assumption that every single every 
  single file in that folder is expected to have a proof and if it 
  doesn't have a proof I can generate it or if the proof fails I 
  can regenerate it and that's what these small line.
Ben_-_Transmute:  organization is doing.
Ben_-_Transmute: Okay either ping me or pull pin issue.
https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-vocab/pull/508
https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-vocab/pull/509
<ben_-_transmute> merge out of call okay
https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-vocab/pull/510
Ben_-_Transmute: Also I think we should probably add result of 
  jazz to the getting nor file so that doesn't get committed so I 
  will.
Ben_-_Transmute: I think so it probably looks like you committed 
  in the previous one and it's probably gonna it's probably gonna 
  thrash for every for every poor request so we can we can fix that 
  out a call and just say merge once files fixed.
https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-vocab/pull/511
https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-vocab/pull/513
Russell_Hofvendahl_(mesur.io): I think we might have 512.
https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-vocab/pull/512
Russell_Hofvendahl_(mesur.io): Yeah sure this is pretty 
  straightforward EDD one of the suggestions with EDD appear that 
  was merged last week was to change SHP to shape which makes a lot 
  of sense keep things consistent so this that's all this does.
https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-vocab/pull/513
Russell_Hofvendahl_(mesur.io): Yeah yeah this addresses all 
  undefined terms in the nice Mama files that also where marriage 
  last week.
Russell_Hofvendahl_(mesur.io): So this doesn't this is doesn't 
  affect anything outside of the nice my files.
Russell_Hofvendahl_(mesur.io): Most of most of those a few issues 
  where I just made blatant mistakes like with how with property 
  names or maybe there was one case where there's a missing 
  property there were also I think some cases where types needed to 
  be defined better but yeah it was just kind of a cleanup thing.
https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-interop/pulls
https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-interop/pull/319
Mike Prorock:  Woman pulling it up the are details because I 
  looked at this.
Mike Prorock:  Yeah the are details were reasonably constrained 
  prior and so there were some problems in there so that's what he 
  fixed so he gave it the ability to return a raise and Cetera from 
  are details.
https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-interop/pull/320
https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-interop/pull/321
https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-interop/pull/322
Khalid_Gobin: Yeah but as for me.
Khalid_Gobin: Yeah so the idea of this was just tackle the issue 
  of hosted Cosmic elections I was reading the Forum and I saw that 
  the tasks were two further.
Khalid_Gobin: Like we did we discuss it in the chat where we were 
  talking about the host Postman Collections and you said every 
  moving away from that so I just added how to import the postman 
  collections in the readme.
Khalid_Gobin: It is the other line.
Khalid_Gobin: Yeah I have one question regarding issue 100 which 
  is the hosted Postman collections.
Khalid_Gobin: You okay yeah so you said that we need to add a 
  list of collections to the Respec can you clarify what is the 
  respect.
https://w3c-ccg.github.io/traceability-vocab/
https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-interop/issues/100
<ben_-_transmute> Respec document: 
  https://w3id.org/traceability/interoperability
https://w3c-ccg.github.io/traceability-interop/
<ben_-_transmute> Location in repo: 
  https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-interop/blob/main/docs/index.html
Khalid_Gobin: Yeah it does.
https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-vocab/issues?q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+sort%3Aupdated-asc
https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-vocab/issues/241
https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-vocab/issues/178
Ben_-_Transmute: She will put a tag on this if it's externally 
  blocked or something too.
Ben_-_Transmute: I can make the label.
https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-vocab/issues/327
https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-vocab/issues/344
Orie Steele:  It's what this is I guess it's just a comment also 
  about the way that we're labeling or undefined terms because as 
  you read them they kind of come up with these camelcase fragment 
  based your eyes and there's a number of sort of unfortunate side 
  effects that come from that like one it makes the term definition 
  very unreadable and maybe that was your goal but that's sort of 
  like throwing you're going.
Orie Steele:   Throw an exception you might.
<ben_-_transmute> should we add "ready for PR"?
Orie Steele:  Throwing nice exception right in the case of 
  undefined terms it's not a thrown exception really if we're doing 
  this at vocab mapping so I think we want to make it a little bit 
  more readable a little bit friendlier to the folks that are going 
  to produce tons of these I mean your first experience in json-ld 
  as a Json developer is you're going to manufacture credentials 
  with undefined terms that's what you're going to do and so we 
  should be thinking about the.
Orie Steele:  As of credentials and making them gentle but direct 
  and so I think that changing the way we're handling at vocab 
  there's options that we could there's things we can do like there 
  that might be a little bit friendlier I think we should think 
  about them I will leave some comments on the issue I think it's 
  it's not done until we're done with undefined terms.
Orie Steele:   Which will never be done with.
Orie Steele:  It's other stuff to I'll leave a comment on the.
Ben_-_Transmute: Should Mark this is right for PR.
Orie Steele:  I don't think it's ready for PR I think it needs 
  to.
Mike Prorock:  Orange defining new terms.
Ben_-_Transmute: Well know that way you can tell it was written 
  by a true programmer.
Mike Prorock:  Exam pant I mean it kind of makes sense it's an 
  example expansion yeah.
https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-vocab/issues/324
Mike Prorock:  Witnesses saying is that everyone except for 
  obstinate me is well behaved.
Orie Steele:  Archon I would just say I really appreciated having 
  that conversation earlier Mike because it's this is what we're 
  here to work on like we're doing a modeling issue and I think 
  it's excellent and we should just refine it a bit more before we 
  have such an open discussion on an issue but I think I like I 
  like being able to also have these discussions and not just 
  mindlessly cross issues with no commentary so I think.
Ben_-_Transmute: Yeah I I really I mean I would have been I would 
  have been more than happy to spend the entire hour if we didn't 
  have for request to get through that was very tempting.
Orie Steele:  Yeah that I think is correct like we should.
Ted Thibodeau: +1 Vocal discussion is important and valuable
Orie Steele: +1
Mike Prorock:  Well we totally my bad because I literally called 
  Russell from like I did some weird place and was like Hey can you 
  Johnson code down and I what I should have said was jot this 
  example down in an issue is what I should have done instead I 
  said hey just fire up in a PR and see what people say and that 
  obviously was the wrong strategy.
<orie> but PRs do generate more conversation than issues :)
<orie> lol
Ben_-_Transmute: Have a great day.
Received on Wednesday, 3 August 2022 10:29:36 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wednesday, 3 August 2022 10:29:37 UTC