[MINUTES] W3C CCG Weekly Call - 2022-08-09

Thanks to Manu Sporny for scribing this week!

The transcript for the call is now available here:

https://w3c-ccg.github.io/meetings/2022-08-09/

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/2022-08-09/audio.ogg

----------------------------------------------------------------
W3C CCG Weekly Teleconference Transcript for 2022-08-09

Agenda:
  https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-credentials/2022Aug/0057.html
Topics:
  1. Announcements
  2. Update from W3C Advisory Board
  3. W3C Host Organization Successes and Challenges
  4. Asia-Pacific W3C Community Building
  5. Current Status and Confidence Level
  6. Financial Outlook of W3C, Inc.
  7. Mitigations for Worst Case Scenarios
  8. W3C Advisory Board and Credentials Community Q/A
Organizer:
  Mike Prorock
Scribe:
  Manu Sporny
Present:
  Mike Prorock, Igarashi (SONY), Tzviya Siegman, Erica Connell, 
  Allison Fromm, Will, Manu Sporny, Jeff O - HumanOS, TallTed // 
  Ted Thibodeau Jr (via iPhone), Chris Wilson, Eric Siow, David 
  Singer, Wei Ding, Razvan Braghesiu (Lightpass), Léonie Watson, 
  Florian (AB, IE, he/him), Charles E. Lehner, Kimberly Linson, 
  David Chadwick, Kerri Lemoie, Tatsuya Igarashi, Orie Steele, 
  Kayode Ezike, Dmitri Zagidulin, Mike Peck, Tantek Çelik, James 
  Chartrand, Leo, Adrian Gropper, BrentZ, Kaliya Young, Florian 
  Rivoal, Alex M, Andrew Whitehead, Phil L (P1)

Manu Sporny is scribing.
Mike Prorock:  Welcome everyone to the weekly CCG call. I 
  appreciate the folks jumping in from Asia-Pacific. We are going 
  to get an update from the Advisory Board today. We'll drive into 
  that in a moment.
Mike Prorock: https://www.w3.org/Consortium/cepc/
Mike Prorock: https://www.w3.org/community/credentials/join
Mike Prorock:  This meeting is covered by the Code of Ethics and 
  Professional Conduct. All substantive contributors need to be 
  members of CCG.
Mike Prorock:  We are just taking a light transcription today, no 
  audio or video recording.
Mike Prorock:  We queue speakers w/ raising a hand or you can q+
Mike Prorock:  You can also do something like "q+ to mention XYZ"
Mike Prorock:  If you don't have access to chat, you can be asked 
  to be put on the queue. This meeting is held by voice,  offtopic 
  conversations might be removed.
Mike Prorock:  We're going to get an update and then go into 
  discussion.

Topic: Announcements

Manu Sporny:  Announcement - 4 specs moving over the VCWG - 
  please sign ip release if you have contributed to those docs 
  [scribe assist by Mike Prorock]
Manu Sporny:   Announcement- rebooting web of trust coming up in 
  Sept. pre-tpac - please submit papers, etc [scribe assist by Mike 
  Prorock]
Erica Connell: https://rwot11.eventbrite.com/
Manu Sporny:  Also please register for TPAC if you are interested 
  - number of items related to CCG work will be there [scribe 
  assist by Mike Prorock]
Manu Sporny:  CHAPI updates are pushed publicly - allowing 
  selection of issuers, etc and integration [scribe assist by Mike 
  Prorock]
Kerri Lemoie:  Yesterday, we opened up registration for the 2nd 
  Jobs for the Future and Verifiable Credentials for Education 
  plugfest.
Kerri Lemoie: Plugfest: 
  https://w3c-ccg.github.io/vc-ed/plugfest-2-2022/
Kerri Lemoie: Vc-edu: https://w3c-ccg.github.io/vc-ed/
Kerri Lemoie:  We did have a VC EDU call yesterday, minutes will 
  be published soon.
Mike Prorock:  Thanks for the update on VC EDU appreciate the 
  work done there.
Kaliya Young: https://www.radicalxchange.org/2022-conference/
Kaliya Young:  Radical Exchange is hosting unconference at IIW to 
  support dialogue around digital identity in decentralized 
  socieities, looking at intersection of Decentralized Web, 
  Decentralized Societies, link to the event above.
Kaliya Young:  We'd love to see folks attend.
Mike Prorock:  With that, let's dive into main topic of the call 
  today -- update from the W3C Advisory Board, a follow on to 
  meeting with Jeff Jaffe last week.

Topic: Update from W3C Advisory Board

Mike Prorock:  We're going to get updates from all of them on how 
  things are going in AB and with W3C Transition.
Mike Prorock:  We work quite a bit on digital credentials here, 
  broad usage starting... wanted to start off w/ a question -- 
  progress of legal entity, spin off from MIT, what's going on, 
  what's keeping you up at night?

Topic: W3C Host Organization Successes and Challenges

Florian Rivoal:  Yes, happy to start... in terms of whats going 
  good/bad -- a big achievement through last year was to manage to 
  get agreement on a W3C Board design that has a W3C Member company 
  majority on it. We have agreed on both principle and in detail 
  now.
Florian Rivoal:  It's keystone of everything for proper 
  governance.
Florian Rivoal:  For Chinese Beihang host and Japanese Keio host, 
  we are having good productive discussions and are doing good work 
  with them. Overall, community, membership, team is having good 
  will and is trying to get us through this. We're all pulling in 
  the same direction.
Florian Rivoal:  In terms of a mixed bag -- MIT has been 
  communicating, but they're taking the hard stance that they're 
  exiting in December 2022, aside from some research, everything 
  else is stopping... brutal stop hard date at end of year is not 
  making things easy.
Florian Rivoal:  In terms of ERCIM, we have next to no 
  communication with the leadership -- no visibility in how they 
  can work with legal entity in the future, these discussions have 
  failed to start. That's the european host.
Florian Rivoal:  In part due to MIT deadline, which makes it very 
  clear where deadline is, we have very little time left (until end 
  of year)... we have bylaws, but no details... other items remain 
  partially done with little time to finish them.
Florian Rivoal:  Overall, I think there is not a major concern 
  about money in vs. money out -- it has been 
  stable/steady-state-ish -- we might start out with very little 
  money in the bank... even if flows are fine, we don't have much 
  padding.
Mike Prorock:  Getting at transition from hosted orgs to single 
  entity, 27 years as separate orgs members reporting into these 
  hosts... what are the primary impacts that could occur?
Chris Wilson:  I want to calm any concerns that we would fail to 
  consolidate -- it's important to understand that the pressure to 
  transition is that one of the hosts wants to depart the hosting 
  agreement. We have to do something about that. The consolidation 
  is less time sensitive.
Chris Wilson:  There are a couple of ways we could fail -- we 
  could fail to bring all of provided services up to level of 
  communities we've had -- Keio/Beihang have provided great 
  support, we'd like to bring everyone up to this level.
Chris Wilson:  We could stop providing support in US/EU -- but I 
  don't think that'll happen.. Certainly Keio/Beihang will support. 
  If we can't migrate to better unified community across the world, 
  at the worst, we won't be worse off than we are today. We might 
  fail to sieze the opportunity and be better.
Chris Wilson:  The biggest concern I have is the financial end, 
  the host structures have provided a financial buffer, and without 
  them, we don't have that luxury anymore... it's a "What happens 
  if there is a recession or a bunch of members leave?"
Chris Wilson:  We'll get into that more later.

Topic: Asia-Pacific W3C Community Building

Mike Prorock:  About community-driven side in Asia-Pacific -- 
  there are a lot of lessons to be learned there. Opportunities to 
  identify community building?
Mike Prorock:  Dinwei, lessons that Americans and Europeans could 
  learn from the successful community building done in Asia-Pacific 
  region?
Wei Ding:  I do think Beihang did a good job in the  transition. 
  I think it's the right way to go, for leveraging centralized 
  resources helping W3C get to a better future. I'm not speaking 
  for Beihang, but I communicate and work with them a lot, as AB. 
  We may get some risks in the journey but which could be addressed 
  well by working closely with our WGs, just like we are doing now.
Wei Ding:  We believe we will get this done, we will help W3C 
  build a strong community for the Web. Personally, I have strong 
  confidence that we'll achieve that.
Mike Prorock:  There seem to be some philosophical differences 
  with how W3C is approaching the new organization -- Tzviya, mind 
  providing input?
Tzviya Siegman:  I think we're closer than we might seem to come 
  across. We are making progress, we've worked hard to gain 
  consensus, the details are where there are heated debate... while 
  they are important, they are details.
Tzviya Siegman:  This all comes back to losing sight of being 
  respectful and understanding different communities. Sometimes we 
  get wrapped up and lose sight of that.
Tzviya Siegman:  We do have some disagreements... a mechanism to 
  absorb all of the Hosts, vs. that not happening.
Tzviya Siegman:  It looks like it's going to be impossible to 
  absorb all of the hosts, hosts want some autonomy, need to build 
  relationship with hosts that choose to work with us, come to an 
  agreement on how best to move forward with our partners. That's 
  where tensions are coming

Topic: Current Status and Confidence Level

Tzviya Siegman:  David Singer, what is your confidence level with 
  single member driven organization vs. separate Host structure -- 
  multiple motivations involved, close contact w/ members, what's 
  your read on that?
David Singer:  It's overall positive, when we're constructing the 
  legal entity, the board of that legal entity must be in control 
  of how money is spent, we're moving budgetary over to board from 
  Hosts and Partners, that will be a fundamental shift, that way 
  we'll be agreeing on a global budget, what functions the budget 
  will be supporting, who will be providing those fucntions, and so 
  on. This is a fundamental shift in thinking that enhances our 
  ability to think in a world wide way.
David Singer:  At the moment, we're very much at the mercy of the 
  partners and hosts, who are supposed to talk to each other, but 
  that has been sporadic. Having a comprehensive look at spend has 
  been challenging. I have strong hopes that by moving control of 
  spending to central board, it'll help... it's a process that will 
  be ongoing, but it is a catalytic change.
Mike Prorock:  It looks like we'll maintain partnerships to 
  Beihang and Keio, if we centralize, will that change things, what 
  are the concerns?
Léonie Watson:  Until we figure it out, there will be concerns, 
  like so many other things w/ legal entity, what we want, each of 
  regional partners has to offer, we need to balance that against 
  need. Our existing host organizations... 4 of them... 195+ 
  countries in the world, bringing it back to community, that's the 
  balance we need to strike.
Léonie Watson:  Certainly across different areas, different 
  regional areas that do exist, it'll mean creating regional 
  communities -- maybe Host hasn't helped much in the past, someone 
  better might step in.
Mike Prorock: Nb: 3 more quick questions and then we will open up 
  queue for more open Q&A
Léonie Watson:  This is not just contract negotiation, but real 
  answer will touch on different areas of governance or have 
  oversight (new board).
Mike Prorock:  Igarashi-san, what are you hearing from AC 
  members... what are you seeing from Japan, companies/members you 
  engage with? Any concerns regarding the transition?
Tatsuya Igarashi:  I focus on geographic diversity on operation 
  of W3C, as you know, W3C Keio, that community formalized in 
  Japan, we have a local activity, partner will continue to take 
  that role.
Tatsuya Igarashi:  I don't have a big concern on the legal 
  entity, the main purpose is the strong governance of W3C 
  operation... governance, geographic diversity.

Topic: Financial Outlook of W3C, Inc.

Mike Prorock:  Eric Siow, given your financial background, what's 
  your assessment of financial viability of new legal entity -- 
  ability to raise funds, thoughts?
Eric Siow:  Yes, Mike, you're right, financials are a big concern 
  for us... Historically, MIT and the other hosts take a cut of the 
  revenue, and they charge an overhead on top of salaries and 
  services that they provide to W3C. So, when revenue is short, 
  they cover the shortfall. After the spinoff, W3C Inc will be a 
  standalone entity, it needs to be self-sustaining... wrt. risk 
  assessment, we are unable to give a definitive assessment at this 
  point. It has been quite challenging to create a realistic 
  financial forecast. We're working through the details in the MIT 
  financial records.  It is a different accounting method. There 
  are items that we have to figure out.
Eric Siow:  There is also an ongoing negotiation of assets at 
  W3C. The most important is how much cash will MITtransfer to W3C, 
  Inc. at the end of year. Another thing that's challenging, we're 
  still negotiating with the hosts, when we're transitioning and 
  the terms of the transitions. Obviously, we're sailing into 
  uncertain economic times. We have to get our arms around the 
  potential impact from the economic downturn.
Eric Siow:  It is probably that we'll need funding based on what 
  we know today.
Eric Siow:  My concern is the tight deadline, fundraising is a 
  very time consuming process. I'm less concerned about 
  availability of funding, I don't know if the organization will be 
  ready for the due diligence process. It's critical that we win 
  the trust and confidence of funders. This means that the 
  financial information provided must be accurate and reliable. We 
  will also need a realistic, rational and credible business plan.  
  The management team has to demonstrate the ability and 
  willingness to identify issues and articulate a compelling plan 
  to address them.
Eric Siow:  Finally, you have to give funders assurance that you 
  will have strong oversight and governance.
<kaliya_identitywoman> This is slightly orthogonal to where the 
  conversation is - What about Web3 efforts around standardization 
  - DIDs/VCs are a starting point but you have the Chain Agnostic 
  Standards Alliance that is just writing stuff in GitHub.

Topic: Mitigations for Worst Case Scenarios

Mike Prorock:  Tantek, there are a lot of moving pieces here, 
  you've been around for a while -- what should we realistically be 
  doing other than produce good technical output? What is your read 
  on things?
Tantek Çelik:  Thanks for having me and the rest of the AB as 
  well -- I've been working w/ CSS and other technologies for 20 
  years, been on Advisory Board for 5 years as well -- worked at 
  several layers of the stack. Big lesson learned -- we're here to 
  do technical work of standardization. We shouldn't lose focus on 
  that, that's why we're at W3C, that's why we collectively 
  participate, there are other benefits... W3C is not a social 
  club, that's not the point of why we're here, we're here to 
  collaborate on work of technical standardization.
Tantek Çelik:  Once we recognize that as a priority, we want the 
  communities to be productive regardless of structures 
  changing/shifting around us. There are a couple of measures we've 
  taken over th eyears -- the permissive license was one of them.
Tantek Çelik:  That is what CCG/VCWG uses -- that enables the 
  technical work of standardization to happen anywhere... it puts 
  prioritization of doing technical work at center. There is a 
  priority of constituents in HTML, users over browsers over 
  academic purity. It doesn't refer to beaureaucrats... we're 
  talking about a bureacratic structure whose entire goal should be 
  to enable technical work. The legal structure should be last, 
  it's a means to an end... by centering that value/prirotiy, we 
  can see how community here is doing good work, freedom with 
  license to work wherever necessary, beyond that, this community 
  has done a great job of supporting their own infrastructure.
Tantek Çelik:  The Jitsi-IRC integration is a great example of 
  communities supporting themselves, there is a lot the members and 
  communities can do, and CCG has particularly done, that can 
  weather the storms -- I want to praise that work. If worse comes 
  to worse, W3C disappears/server stop working, groups could design 
  for that, but a lot of that has been done in this group.
Tantek Çelik:  Like, if IRC goes down, where do you go? Jitsi 
  chat works well, maybe that works for this group. This group and 
  other groups should have that conversation w/ themselves and 
  others... how could we reduce impact of these kinds of 
  uncertainties. That doesn't mean we don't want W3C, we want a 
  good healthy organization.
<igarashi_> I have a little bit concern on the ERCIM situation 
  from the perspective of geological diversity. W3C should have 
  presence in Europe.
Tantek Çelik:  We should also be able to control our own destiny.
Mike Prorock:  Yes, this group controls its own destinity, 
  sometimes to the aggravation of others... mailing list and async 
  communications could be of concern.
<david_singer> (It's a real pleasure to meet with you again. 
  Thanks for having us here.)

Topic: W3C Advisory Board and Credentials Community Q/A

Manu Sporny:  Clarity on hosts / ercim in particular and 
  communication path there? [scribe assist by Mike Prorock]
Manu Sporny:  Question 2 - how to "build a rainy day fund" for 
  new org [scribe assist by Mike Prorock]
Manu Sporny:  What is the communiation issue with ERCIM? What 
  other mechanisms for alternative funding have been considered?
Léonie Watson:  As for ERCIM, it's complicated -- with ERCIM and 
  their motivations, there are people in the Team with 
  benefits/packages through long service with ERCIM and we need to 
  understand that some of these people (rightly) don't want to walk 
  away from those benefits that they've worked so hard for.
Léonie Watson:  As for the rainy day fund, we do need to look at 
  that -- two sides to that answer, the new organization is going 
  to have to behave like it's a bootstrap startup without 
  funding... with limited funds. That's a big part of the attitude 
  we need to go in with.
Mike Prorock: +1 Tink
Léonie Watson:  How can we bootstrap up to the next tier... under 
  consideration.
Florian Rivoal:  With regards to ERCIM, we are guessing... ERCIM 
  leadershpi has not communicated at all.... the ERCIM staff is 
  communicating. We have little hope that discussion will be 
  engaged through the rest of the year. One way or the other, as 
  soon as there is a board, we need to start conversation w/ ERCIM, 
  once we have a representative governance body in place, from that 
  point, all indications is that ERCIM wants to continue to be a 
  center in Europe.
Florian Rivoal:  If people are going to behave reasonably, we can 
  probably have a good resolution here. We need a time buffer to 
  get to that solution.
Mike Prorock:  So, once there is a new W3C Board structure, they 
  will be able to directly engage with ERCIM? The current 
  leadership is unable to do so?
Florian Rivoal:  We do not know why ERCIM is not responding... 
  not because new people in charge, but as David alluded to, 
  currently we don't have central governance above the hosts... 
  they're all responsible for their own part. Once we have a board, 
  there will be a central governance structure. It will be 
  incredibly self-destructive if they don't engage. W3C Member 
  continuity isn't difficult, just assign them to a different 
  organization, but hopefully we can just continue with ERCIM.
Florian Rivoal:  Given lack of engagement, we might have to turn 
  to alternatives.
Tzviya Siegman:  It's important to recognize that there is good 
  reason to work with ERCIM, the staff of ERCIM have been 
  incredibly engaged, there is a great pride in ERCIM to be 
  involved in W3C... it was founded in Europe, we want a way to 
  hold on to that.
Tzviya Siegman:  There is a proposal about coming to something 
  complete... not full partner agreement, but perhaps research 
  agreement, we want to maintain the relationship ... but perhaps 
  not in the same way as before.
Tzviya Siegman:  Nobody wants to do away with ERCIM, valuable 
  partner, bring them up to level of partner we'd like to see.
David Singer:  On ERCIM, there are some aspects of ERCIM that are 
  entangled in personal relationships that the W3C Board could 
  address.
David Singer:  On the funding question, it's good to remember 
  that we have a funding problem, we decided a few years ago that 
  we shouldn't go on without it, but now we don't have that and 
  have to move, and so now we have to behave like a startup.
Mike Prorock: +1 Tantek
David Singer:  When you ask people for money, they as either 1) 
  show me that you're a fiscally well run organizations -- our 
  books are incomprehensible and we don't have an accumulated 
  reserve, or 2) they want oversight into how money will be 
  handled. Some people want W3C to be run as flat organization with 
  no tiered sponsorship (how can we protect ourselves from sponsors 
  instead of how can we attract them)
David Singer:  So, we will have to act like a startup without a 
  buffer.
Mike Prorock:  Look at Tantek's link about chapters 
  https://chapters.w3.org/ and points about accountability & asking 
  questions, etc.
Chris Wilson:  I'll be brief, I agree with everything that David 
  said about funding -- we do need to ensure that W3C is a well 
  run, fiscially responsible organization. We need to accumulate a 
  reserve, in the past we couldn't keep a reserve because Hosts 
  didn't put it aside, there was no entity to secure those funds. 
  We need to have fiscal responsibility, if we can get money from 
  people, providing oversight of funds... want to underscore this 
  is "fiscal responsibility" not "technical agenda".
<eric_siow> Big +1 to Chris.
Tantek Çelik: +1 Chris
Chris Wilson:  No one has been looking for control over 
  "technical agenda" -- we haven't taken money in the past w/o 
  fiscal responsibility in place -- once we have a board in place, 
  figuring out what that plan is is important.
Tantek Çelik:  Our systems of leadership and power work best when 
  we continue to ask questions. My call to action is to keep asking 
  questions, please keep challenging and questioning the systems of 
  power and control that you're subject to... the values, 
  transparency, we only benefit when you do so.
Tantek Çelik:  Four hosts is not representative of a 195 
  countries, no matter who that host is, that is too centralized... 
  the chapters program is not well known about, but it does exist 
  and have potential, it's far more decentralized and local to 
  communities. I wanted to leave you all with that potential ray of 
  hope. Please keep asking questions, keeping status quo, stay the 
  course are problematic. We are in a change, we have to 
  participate in steering in the direction that we want.
Mike Prorock:  +1 To local chapters, that has helped well in the 
  environmental movements.
Mike Prorock:  Thank you to everyone from AB for your time, 
  everyone here from both CG perspective and AB have a lot to 
  offer. Much, much appreciated, especially for those that have 
  joined us from 3am their local time.
<david_singer> (great being with you all again. thank you)
<phil_l_(p1)> Appreciation to the AB members for sharing the 
  story unfolding.
<eric_siow> Thank you for having us.
<dingwei> thank you CCG, bye
Mike Prorock:  This is super helpful, we'll switch back to more 
  technical topics after this week... but this stuff is important, 
  which is why we covered it.
<tantek> Thanks for having us

Received on Monday, 15 August 2022 12:58:04 UTC