- From: Brent Shambaugh <brent.shambaugh@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2022 16:02:35 -0500
- To: Orie Steele <orie@transmute.industries>
- Cc: CCG Minutes Bot <minutes@w3c-ccg.org>, "W3C Credentials CG (Public List)" <public-credentials@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CACvcBVpYjbPpM=X_cQdKxnz0opdw9G8eQMZhu9TBoTFdd+UG1A@mail.gmail.com>
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> wrote: > 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. >> >> >> > > -- > *ORIE STEELE* > Chief Technical Officer > www.transmute.industries > > <https://www.transmute.industries> >
Received on Tuesday, 19 July 2022 21:03:02 UTC