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

Re: [MINUTES] W3C CCG Traceability Call - 2022-07-19

From: Brent Shambaugh <brent.shambaugh@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2022 16:02:35 -0500
Message-ID: <CACvcBVpYjbPpM=X_cQdKxnz0opdw9G8eQMZhu9TBoTFdd+UG1A@mail.gmail.com>
To: Orie Steele <orie@transmute.industries>
Cc: CCG Minutes Bot <minutes@w3c-ccg.org>, "W3C Credentials CG (Public List)" <public-credentials@w3.org>
What seems to be the problem? Maybe this is something I could help with?

-Brent Shambaugh

GitHub: https://github.com/bshambaugh
Website: http://bshambaugh.org/
LinkedIN: https://www.linkedin.com/in/brent-shambaugh-9b91259
Skype: brent.shambaugh
Twitter: https://twitter.com/Brent_Shambaugh
WebID: http://bshambaugh.org/foaf.rdf#me

On Tue, Jul 19, 2022 at 3:56 PM Orie Steele <orie@transmute.industries>

> hmm seems the minutes did not publish properly.
> OS
> On Tue, Jul 19, 2022 at 2:33 PM CCG Minutes Bot <minutes@w3c-ccg.org>
> wrote:
>> Thanks to Our Robot Overlords for scribing this week!
>> The transcript for the call is now available here:
>> https://w3c-ccg.github.io/meetings/2022-07-19-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/2022-07-19-traceability/audio.ogg
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------
>> Verifiable Traceability Task Force Transcript for 2022-07-19
>> Agenda:
>>   https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-interop/AGENDA.md
>> Topics:
>>   1. IP Note, Agenda Review, Scribe Selection
>>   2. GitHub Issue & PR review
>> Organizer:
>>   Orie Steele, Mike Prorock, Mahmoud Alkhraishi
>> Scribe:
>>   Our Robot Overlords
>> Present:
>>   Chris Abernethy, Russell Hofvendahl (mesur.io), Ben - Transmute,
>>   nis, TallTed // Ted Thibodeau (he/him) (OpenLinkSw.com), Orie
>>   Steele, Ted Thibodeau, Vivien
>> Our Robot Overlords are scribing.
>> Ben_-_Transmute: Yeah maybe we could switch do like 30 minutes or
>>   30 minutes or something.
>> Ben_-_Transmute: Yeah all right I'll definitely I'll definitely
>>   take thirst first 30 minutes okay so the first thing we need to
>>   do is read the meeting notes so this meeting is held up by
>>   voiceover jitsi at the link and covers for requesting issues on
>>   items related to the various pieces of ccg projects related to
>>   traceability and the supply chain primary repositories are
>>   directed Track by the group for discussion or the traceability
>>   roof vocabulary and traceability intro.
>> Ben_-_Transmute: Perpetuity alternates between each of the above
>>   two repositories.
>> Ben_-_Transmute: Channel note the.
>> Ben_-_Transmute: For the weekend start up meeting so this week I
>>   believe we are in vocab correct.
>> Topic: IP Note, Agenda Review, Scribe Selection
>> Ben_-_Transmute: Okay we have a standing Agenda One IP note
>>   agenda review subscribe section agenda review IP note anyone can
>>   participate in these calls however all substantial contributions
>>   to any ccg work items must be members of the ccg with full IP are
>>   agreements signed in the URL and sure you have a w3c account that
>>   we three can carry license agreement and call notes these minutes
>>   and audio recording of everything set on the collar archived at.
>> Ben_-_Transmute:  the link and then let's see and Jeff.
>> Topic: GitHub Issue & PR review
>> Ben_-_Transmute: I think we're okay to skip the rest of this
>>   after that Q other good stuff as we go so I guess let's go ahead
>>   and get started with traceability vocab pull requests.
>> https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-vocab/pull/474
>> Ben_-_Transmute: And we have one that is merged marked as merch
>>   first so I will go ahead and start with pull request or 74.
>> Ben_-_Transmute: Okay so since this is my poor request what this
>>   does is this goes through a lot of the verifiable credential or
>>   other verify credentials that I know adds a tag to The yellow
>>   section of them and Mahmood made a note on this to say can we
>>   have multiple tags and the answer is absolutely yes this there's
>>   nothing service for these tags currently the main reason I wanted
>>   to add them is because number one it makes scripting.
>> Ben_-_Transmute: Through credentials and searching through them.
>> <tallted> best path forward after 474 --
>> https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-vocab/pulls?q=is%3Apr+is%3Aopen+sort%3Aupdated-asc
>> Ben_-_Transmute
>> <https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-vocab/pulls?q=is%3Apr+is%3Aopen+sort%3Aupdated-ascBen_-_Transmute>:
>> Here to say like hey give me all the credentials
>>   that relate to e-commerce I can search them and then write
>>   scripts and make changes as needed and then also later on we can
>>   service this and the respect document and the open API spec as
>>   needed to make how these are used more visible.
>> Ben_-_Transmute:  so if there are no.
>> Ben_-_Transmute: Sentence to emerging 474 I will go ahead and do
>>   so.
>> Ben_-_Transmute: Okay merging 474.
>> https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-vocab/pull/471
>> Ben_-_Transmute: Okay and then going back and starting from
>>   oldest to newest I'll just go ahead and order the next one is
>>   pull request for 71 by this so feel free to take it.
>> Ben_-_Transmute: Okay any objections to emerging pull requests
>>   for 71.
>> Ben_-_Transmute: Okay merging for because 471.
>> https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-vocab/pull/472
>> Ben_-_Transmute: Next pull request is for 72 this is also mine
>>   and what it does is it updates our CI script for schemas to vote
>>   count that Jess and what this does is it reads through all the
>>   credentials as we're building the HTML for the gets built into
>>   the respect document and it looks for dependencies that are used
>>   inside the credential and it adds some has links under the schema
>>   credit under the exam.
>> Ben_-_Transmute: Just as a side note testing this locally really
>>   improved readability because you can quickly jump to other
>>   credentials that are related to these so thank you 40 any
>>   objections to merging pull requests for 72.
>> Chris_Abernethy: Yeah I like this one a lot.
>> https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-vocab/pull/473
>> Ben_-_Transmute: Okay it was it was a small change by I'm very
>>   happy with how it turned out so the next one is pull request for
>>   73 posting in chat this is a very small change there is no
>>   description in the commercial invoice certificate example Jason
>>   and all this does is just add a quick description too.
>> Ben_-_Transmute: To that effect.
>> Ben_-_Transmute: So I think this should be a pretty easy one to
>>   merge our there any objections.
>> Ben_-_Transmute: Okay emerging 473.
>> Ben_-_Transmute: Okay then the next one is for request for 75.
>> https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-vocab/pull/475
>> Ben_-_Transmute: I guess I was pretty active this week I was
>>   looking through tickets that our backlog and just looking for
>>   easy ones to snipe this addresses issue 235 which we have issue
>>   which is we're using the issue for a issue and Trace vocab as a
>>   placeholder for our example Jason and this room looks at and
>>   updates it with new data for the relocation list 2020 status and
>>   your objections to merging 475.
>> https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-vocab/pull/476
>> Ben_-_Transmute: Okay the next one is 476 by 40.
>> Orie Steele:  Right clean up workflow definitions this PR
>>   basically just updates the way that we were referring to some
>>   terms it gives us a way to link directly to the extensions we've
>>   made to the technical recommendation for verifiable credentials.
>> Ben_-_Transmute: Okay any objections to emerging 476.
>> Ben_-_Transmute: Okay the next one is fixing a crown description
>>   478 -.
>> https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-vocab/pull/478
>> Ben_-_Transmute: Okay very small change I think everyone is okay
>>   with this says to approvals merging or some gate.
>> https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-vocab/pull/479
>> Ben_-_Transmute: Next one is for 79 by this looks like Russell
>>   yes what do you want to discuss for Sunday night.
>> Russell_Hofvendahl_(mesur.io): Yeah sure this provides a lot of
>>   this provides the credentials that will be needed for people to
>>   submit information about the CTE s critical tracking events and
>>   key data elements they can comply with the the new traceability
>>   rule by the FDA.
>> Ben_-_Transmute: Okay it looks like there is a bunch of
>>   conversations on the pull request nothing that is specifically
>>   blocking are there any objections or any final challenges before
>>   we merge 479.
>> Ben_-_Transmute: Okay merging it's okay.
>> Ben_-_Transmute: Merging for Sunday night.
>> https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-vocab/pull/480
>> Ben_-_Transmute: Okay the next one is 86 intend to important
>>   priority.
>> Orie Steele:  Right talked with Mike Baroque about this this is a
>>   pull request which essentially just changes the name of a example
>>   credential I think Miss had mentioned something about a pull
>>   request that was based off of this that might be coming late so
>>   if Miss if you've already done that then we should merge yours
>>   instead of mine right.
>> https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-vocab/pull/486
>> Ben_-_Transmute: I think it's 486.
>> Ben_-_Transmute: 40 50 in 1020 Fort certificate okay.
>> https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-vocab/pull/485
>> Orie Steele:  And it won't have any changes that I would merge to
>>   mine like if I accept tall Ted's grammar correction it will then
>>   create a conflict between these two and we would want to take
>>   yours if it's more substantive first and then go back and make
>>   that change.
>> Orie Steele:  That's excellent so I would prefer we take yours
>>   which is pull 485.
>> Ben_-_Transmute: Okay so I will I will jump in order and merge 45
>>   do we want to do give a quick summary of what intention Port is
>>   covered.
>> Orie Steele:  Now we've talked about it quite a lot it's
>>   signaling your intent to import and it has a full description of
>>   what it is in the pull request.
>> Ben_-_Transmute: Okay I will go ahead and if there's no check
>>   since I'll go ahead and merge both 45.
>> Ben_-_Transmute: Okay porch 45 was merch.
>> Ben_-_Transmute: You want to take a look at 40 and that actually
>>   automatically closed or a pork roast or a tea I think.
>> https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-vocab/pull/481
>> Ben_-_Transmute: I was nuts I just was worried about not losing
>>   those changes the next tournament is full of requests for 81
>>   which is fixed term bug on raw material this is from this.
>> Ben_-_Transmute: Okay any objections to merging 481.
>> https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-vocab/pull/482
>> Ben_-_Transmute: Everyone is we've got for approvals merging or
>>   three and a half like this G forty-one next one is 482 which is
>>   also notice would you care to describe the changes and.
>> Ben_-_Transmute: Okay so if there's no objections to merging 482
>>   I'm the only person who approved it but let's go ahead and now
>>   okay we have to to approvals up merging 42 and the next one is.
>> Ben_-_Transmute: 83 this is another.
>> https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-vocab/pull/483
>> Ben_-_Transmute: Fix so I think the same one applies I will go
>>   ahead and add an approval and anyone else who would like to see
>>   these changes fixed cannot improve on next two or three things.
>> Ben_-_Transmute: Okay that's that's perfectly fine so just small
>>   term changes emerging or 83.
>> https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-vocab/pull/484
>> Ben_-_Transmute: And the next one is 484 if this is what I think
>>   it is Russell might become my new favorite person.
>> Russell_Hofvendahl_(mesur.io): Yeah I hadn't thought of AG being
>>   confused for silver.
>> Ben_-_Transmute: Okay yeah that's the only thing I can either way
>>   it looks like it just changes the agriculture abbreviations to
>>   agriculture as a whole thing better Clarity better conventions I
>>   am super on board with this change any objections to pull request
>>   44.
>> Ben_-_Transmute: Beautiful I agree merging 44.
>> Russell_Hofvendahl_(mesur.io): Is that is that a property with
>>   accidentally a capital name.
>> Russell_Hofvendahl_(mesur.io): Just a little.
>> Chris_Abernethy: Hang on hang on hang on I have what one question
>>   about the agricultural inspection report line 23 should that be
>>   capital I apologize I just saw it as we're looking through I
>>   think it doesn't have a capital name.
>> Orie Steele:  So attributes or properties should be camelcase and
>>   classes or types should be title case that's the convention.
>> Russell_Hofvendahl_(mesur.io): Um can you repeat what time it is.
>> Chris_Abernethy: And I just created a change request.
>> Chris_Abernethy: It was line 263 okay.
>> Ben_-_Transmute: Let's see should I try birth the commit to go
>>   ahead and.
>> Orie Steele:  We should probably take a follow-up.
>> Russell_Hofvendahl_(mesur.io): Yeah right away.
>> Orie Steele:  Take a tissue or a subsequent pull request if it's
>>   very smoke if I do that.
>> Russell_Hofvendahl_(mesur.io): I can probably didn't real quick
>>   but so.
>> Ben_-_Transmute: All right so just handle another poll request I
>>   think that would be perfectly fine.
>> Ben_-_Transmute: Expert report yeah just handle than a holy
>>   roller coasters.
>> Russell_Hofvendahl_(mesur.io): Sure so another pull request you
>>   said.
>> Ben_-_Transmute: I think though easiest.
>> https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-vocab/pull/486
>> Ben_-_Transmute: Okay important intend to import workflow so this
>>   is 486.
>> Chris_Abernethy: You do the other one.
>> Orie Steele:  Let's do it.
>> https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-vocab/pull/488
>> Ben_-_Transmute: Okay yeah I think although all of the remaining
>>   four of us are from you traceability presentations is the same
>>   thing that has uncommitted suggestions from Ted see my license
>>   number and C mon let's do 488 as that one seems very simple I can
>>   go ahead and describe this if you want to do commits such thing
>>   as license number added this is a small change to Seema.
>> Ben_-_Transmute: License where we a day.
>> Ben_-_Transmute: We're a missing license number which is a
>>   required attribute from the example and so this is just fixing a
>>   small error in the an example Jason that was not addressed until
>>   now so a 488 just fixes the example Jason for see my license this
>>   is a small change I would be extremely surprised if there are any
>>   objections any objections to merging poor request for Ada.
>> Ben_-_Transmute: Okay merging radiate.
>> Ben_-_Transmute: And what's up Russell.
>> Russell_Hofvendahl_(mesur.io): Actually I was just looking at
>>   your suggestion Chris and I'm not sure if I understand it
>>   currently agriculture package is lower case because it is a
>>   property named I don't understand why that would be capitalized.
>> Orie Steele:  Seems correct if it's a property name that it
>>   should be camel case.
>> Chris_Abernethy: Yeah if my suggestion is not valid that's fine I
>>   was just going off of what I was seeing in that file as far as
>>   like patterns and how you were making these changes and that one
>>   seem different to me.
>> Russell_Hofvendahl_(mesur.io): Okay there are some where it says
>>   type agriculture package and those are referencing a file rather
>>   than a property there's somewhere there's a property name that
>>   matches with a schema name later.
>> Orie Steele:  I'm tight yeah.
>> Russell_Hofvendahl_(mesur.io): Cool so that one might be
>>   measurable then.
>> Orie Steele:  That one was emerged as far as I'm aware.
>> Russell_Hofvendahl_(mesur.io): No rape your breasts are great.
>> Ben_-_Transmute: Yeah yeah so if there if there's no changes then
>>   there's no need to put up a subsequent PR to address those
>>   changes.
>> https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-vocab/pull/489
>> Russell_Hofvendahl_(mesur.io): Great thank you.
>> Ben_-_Transmute: Okay the next one to draw attention to is 489 so
>>   we get feedback from just which said that rather than the PHD a
>>   status message this credential or specifically refers to the
>>   status of a shipment and they wanted to make that a lot easier to
>>   understand in terms of shipment status and that is why this
>>   credential has been changed to from PJ status message to PGA
>>   shipment status.
>> Ben_-_Transmute: It looks like there is.
>> Ben_-_Transmute: Request on conflict on the on the on the pull
>>   request is there any objections to merging this outside the call
>>   or a sink as soon as this conflict has been resolved.
>> Ben_-_Transmute: Not I will make a.
>> Orie Steele:  No I'll leave a comment saying that.
>> https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-vocab/pull/486
>> Ben_-_Transmute: Okay and that looks like we gave Miss enough
>>   time to address the feedback so do you want to come back to 486.
>> https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-vocab/pull/487
>> Ben_-_Transmute: It says outdated suggestion so it looks like
>>   there might have been.
>> Orie Steele:  Can you link to the comment in the chat.
>> https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-vocab/pull/487#discussion_r924637141
>> TallTed_//_Ted_Thibodeau_(he/him)_(OpenLinkSw.com)
>> <https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-vocab/pull/487#discussion_r924637141TallTed_//_Ted_Thibodeau_(he/him)_(OpenLinkSw.com)>:
>> Sorry I'm
>>   looking at it now.
>> TallTed_//_Ted_Thibodeau_(he/him)_(OpenLinkSw.com): Right in the
>>   that line in the line 5 that you had changed.
>> TallTed_//_Ted_Thibodeau_(he/him)_(OpenLinkSw.com): You put into
>>   that description it's at the far end but the far right.
>> TallTed_//_Ted_Thibodeau_(he/him)_(OpenLinkSw.com): That's the
>>   same description that was up above so.
>> TallTed_//_Ted_Thibodeau_(he/him)_(OpenLinkSw.com): Intention to
>>   intended use that's all.
>> TallTed_//_Ted_Thibodeau_(he/him)_(OpenLinkSw.com): You took the
>>   notes to myself there you go yep.
>> Ben_-_Transmute: Okay so are we saying it's are we okay for all
>>   requests for 87.
>> Ben_-_Transmute: Or are we or do we want to say that it can be
>>   marched outside of meeting once it's been addressed which one
>>   would you prefer this.
>> Ben_-_Transmute: Okay any objections to the Virgin 4:15 87.
>> Ben_-_Transmute: Searching for Ethan.
>> https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-vocab/pull/486
>> Ben_-_Transmute: Okay 486 is green and gray to be addressed I
>>   think we already talked about this door okay and there is
>>   currently no approvals on it everything has been resolved in the
>>   comments adding a approval hear any objections to emerging for
>>   requests for 86.
>> Ben_-_Transmute: Okay merging poor quest for 86.
>> Ben_-_Transmute: And then that leaves us with our last poll
>>   requests which is opj tell update which will be merged as soon as
>>   the conflict has been resolved so that concludes traceability
>>   vocab.
>> Ben_-_Transmute: Okay that was one of the Lagos for questions I
>>   think we've hacked this do you want do you want to do
>>   traceability interrupt you two want to switch off 30 minutes like
>>   that.
>> Ben_-_Transmute: All right shows yours.
>> https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-interop/pulls
>> Chris_Abernethy: Right so this is if you remember last time we
>>   spoke I had a pull request to create two workflows that would
>>   allow you to rotate the G key and onboard new users with an
>>   encrypted environment file or a suggested that it would be
>>   helpful if we can do this on the command line so folks didn't
>>   have to generate personal access tokens with Google so I added a
>>   couple of wrapper script.
>> Chris_Abernethy: Is that you can run from the command line.
>> <orie> thank for the wrapper scripts... much nicer devx
>> Chris_Abernethy: Then call out and reuse this code that I already
>>   developed certain to run the workflows I also modify the
>>   documentation to indicate that instead of generating the personal
>>   access token you could use the personal access token from the
>>   command line the GitHub command line will dump that for you if
>>   you do I think it was GH off minus t so added functionality with
>>   some rapper Scripts.
>> <orie> excellent documentation!
>> https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-interop/pull/288
>> <orie> awesome work!
>> Chris_Abernethy: Yep so 288 is a modification to the open API
>>   spec when you are issuing a credential the that the issuer ID is
>>   required the spec was not correctly requiring it if it was
>>   presented to issue is presented as an object with an ID parameter
>>   so this adds a requirement on the ID parameter when it's an
>>   object for.
>> Chris_Abernethy: Yeah that's the embedded schema for conformance
>>   testing.
>> https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-interop/pull/290
>> Chris_Abernethy: So this is one of many conformance tests
>>   additions I've added this particular one let's see ads
>>   conformance testing for the did Jason and point and the
>>   identifiers did and point.
>> Chris_Abernethy: Not for those two endpoints but for additional
>>   conformance testing.
>> https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-interop/pull/292
>> Chris_Abernethy: I'm so 292 this is the first of I think what is
>>   going to be several conflicts but the essence of this one is
>>   modifying the variable name used to hold the response schema for
>>   validation of the credentials issue endpoint initially it was
>>   called response schema 201 which is not very descriptive and will
>>   Clash when we do a response game of 2001 validation for
>>   presentations proof so simply renamed.
>> Chris_Abernethy: That it was a bit more descriptive and won't
>>   clash with other variables doing similar schema work.
>> Chris_Abernethy: Or he just added one.
>> https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-interop/pull/295
>> <orie> This is excellent as well
>> Chris_Abernethy: This one is mine as well so when the new
>>   conformance reports list all of the tests that are run the
>>   assertions on the left hand side and they did not include any
>>   sort of name spacing to indicate which end point they were for
>>   and we're going to be having a lot of these and many of them will
>>   have similar names so this change request adds a bit of name
>>   spacing so that it's easily identifiable identifiable which.
>> Chris_Abernethy: Test the assertions belong.
>> https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-interop/pull/296
>> Orie Steele:  Can you link the pull request in chat please.
>> Orie Steele:  Grade I've spoken to Mike about this I think we
>>   should merge over his objection and I can close the loop with him
>>   offline.
>> https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-interop/pull/298
>> Orie Steele:  This is to support did web essentially the did webs
>>   are unresolvable if you don't accept this this change.
>> https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-interop/pull/300
>> Chris_Abernethy: Okay so this one.
>> Chris_Abernethy: This one started because there was a difference
>>   in what I was seeing in the facet view which was the list of
>>   tests with the boxes and what I was seeing in the Sunburst and
>>   the tree charts and the reason for that is that each test has
>>   multiple assertions and the Order of those assertions in the data
>>   frame is being used to drive this visualization is undefined so
>>   depending on when you ran it they.
>> Chris_Abernethy:  might show.
>> <orie> go on, you can make a canonicalization joke
>> Chris_Abernethy: Singer Phelan so the first modification I did
>>   was to aggregate those so that we could determine you know if how
>>   many of these assertions passed and how many failed so that we
>>   could accurately reflect whether a test was fully passing fully
>>   failing or partially failing and in addition to fixing that are I
>>   also added a new color to the Chart so that we can visually see
>>   which ones were partially failing and if you scroll down there's
>>   a couple.
>> Chris_Abernethy:  love pictures.
>> Chris_Abernethy: That show what it looks like now.
>> https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-interop/pull/301
>> <orie> great name change
>> Chris_Abernethy: Okay so in a previous poll request there was a
>>   suggestion to rename the folder titled happy path to positive
>>   testing so I just carry that over to some of the other tests that
>>   were already in place so we are aligned on naming.
>> <orie> more professional looking
>> https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-interop/pull/303
>> Chris_Abernethy: So this one is in relation to the context in a
>>   did document this is defined by did core to be either a string or
>>   an array that contains both or either strings or objects our spec
>>   said it had to be an array of strings so it admitted the just a
>>   string and the array containing objects possibilities so this
>>   modifies the spec to allow for those.
>> https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-interop/pull/304
>> Chris_Abernethy: Three or four is adding the OS to related
>>   conformance - testing for credentials update so verifies that
>>   oauth is required in the request fail if it's not present there
>>   are several of these the first one you merge will merge the rest
>>   will conflict.
>> https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-interop/pull/305
>> Chris_Abernethy: I believe it will look like this as well 306.
>> https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-interop/pull/308
>> Chris_Abernethy: So this one has to do with changes that we made
>>   when we added the conformance testing we now publish report
>>   artifacts into separate folders under the reports folder and
>>   GitHub documents get a page excuse me so this modifies the
>>   reporters so that you can specify which of those two folders to
>>   use as the source when you're running it locally and it downloads
>>   the latest.
>> Chris_Abernethy: Ada and it does that by adding two different
>>   command line options either - see for conformance - I for
>>   interoperability they both also have long versions and this also
>>   sets the stage for 272 which is another issue that is around
>>   modifying the HTML template to be more specific depending on
>>   which type of report is being generated.
>> https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-interop/pull/309
>> Chris_Abernethy: This one has a conflict wasn't expecting that
>>   but I'm not surprised because it's also modifies the postman test
>>   so this adds a test that when the issuer ID is provided in a
>>   credentials issue requests if it is a string but it is not in URI
>>   format then the expected result is a 400 bad request in this ad
>>   it's.
>> Chris_Abernethy: Appropriate - testing to be conformed.
>> Chris_Abernethy: I believe that was added last week.
>> Orie Steele:  It's it's it's a requirement that comes from
>>   understanding verifiable credentials all ID values in verifiable
>>   credential are an alias of a tidy which must be a valid iri.
>> https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-interop/pull/312
>> Chris_Abernethy: So this is ticketed or reopens while back
>>   regarding making the challenge property of presentation options
>>   be required this is simple schema change to implement that
>>   request.
>> Orie Steele:  While we're on it just a comment regarding
>>   challenge challenge if it's a uuid requires sort of stateful
>>   management on the verifier side like the verifier has to remember
>>   that they've given you this uuid and that you know they're going
>>   to theoretically not accept the presentation over it if it comes
>>   to years later because that could be like indicating a problem
>>   you can fix this by making the challenge a Json web token or.
>> Orie Steele:  Something that's signed by the verifier and then.
>> Orie Steele:  Are Fire doesn't need to.
>> Orie Steele:  Member all of the uuids that it's handed out and
>>   this has been raised on a few issues and I'm just pointing it out
>>   here because the structure of challenges and a string it doesn't
>>   say that challenge has to be a uuid and there's a really good
>>   reason why you might want that challenge to be a JWT namely the
>>   example that I just gave so I'm just providing verbal context
>>   because I'm sure we eventually we will see those issues come up
>>   and hopefully people will remember what it said.
>> Orie Steele:  Yeah it's amazing amazing work truly amazing.
>> Ben_-_Transmute: Darkness you want to post the minutes at the end
>>   of the meeting we want to repeat that.
>> Orie Steele:  Yeah I don't think you at least that long to post
>>   the minutes.
>> Chris_Abernethy: I missed you want to do the the publishing of
>>   the minutes on the call so that we can go through it together.
>> Orie Steele:  Let's do it.
>> Ben_-_Transmute: Yes you can you can still get a screen.
>> Chris_Abernethy: I'm happy to guide you I'm familiar with the
>>   process.
>> Ben_-_Transmute: And then Prince do you need to stop recording
>>   for this.
>> Chris_Abernethy: Do we do we want this recorded as part of the
>>   call or know I think we can probably.
>> Chris_Abernethy: That is indeed true.
>> Ben_-_Transmute: Yeah that's that's what I was just thinking.
>> Orie Steele:  Actually it'd be great to return if the problem
>>   will be that you won't get the minutes until you stop recording I
>>   think right it would be amazing if we could record the process of
>>   publishing the minutes.
>> Chris_Abernethy: Perhaps we should plan on doing a screen capture
>>   next time if anyone has it to the appropriate software to do
>>   that.
>> Ben_-_Transmute: Hi I don't think so I was able to grab yeah.
>> Chris_Abernethy: I don't believe so okay so I'll stop recording
>>   now then and we can proceed with the process.
>> Chris_Abernethy: Okay so the first thing you need to do is in the
>>   bottom right you need to select the appropriate meeting where it
>>   says weekly meeting there.
>> Ben_-_Transmute: On the meeting spread to on the back on the
>>   second project that one.
>> Chris_Abernethy: Yes like today and change it from weekly meeting
>>   to believe it's traceability.
> --
> Chief Technical Officer
> www.transmute.industries
> <https://www.transmute.industries>
Received on Tuesday, 19 July 2022 21:03:02 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Tuesday, 19 July 2022 21:03:04 UTC