Re: Publication of VC API as VCWG Draft Note

Mike,

a purely administrative remark, as you were referring to possible rechartering. The out of scope statement you are referring to says:

>  • The normative specification of APIs or protocols

(Emphasis is mine.) My understanding of the CCG proposal is to publish a WG Note, i.e., a non-normative document. In other words, I believe the WG may, if it so decides, publish this document without breaching the charter.

Ivan

> On 19 Nov 2022, at 21:03, Mike Jones <Michael.Jones@microsoft.com> wrote:
> 
> I believe it would be improper for us to publish work done by others as our own.  We should not let the working group become a rubber-stamp for third-party work.
> 
> Furthermore, per https://w3c.github.io/vc-wg-charter/#scope <https://w3c.github.io/vc-wg-charter/#scope>, APIs are explicitly out of scope in our charter.  Before we would publish a document with APIs, we would need to recharter to place them in scope.
> 
>                                                        -- Mike
> 
> From: Orie Steele <orie@transmute.industries>
> Sent: Monday, November 14, 2022 11:28 AM
> To: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
> Cc: W3C Credentials CG <public-credentials@w3.org>; Brent Zundel <brent.zundel@avast.com>; Kristina Yasuda <Kristina.Yasuda@microsoft.com>; Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
> Subject: Re: Publication of VC API as VCWG Draft Note
> 
> Some of us have been swamped by IETF 115 in London, has there been any additional comments on this?
> 
> OS
> 
> On Sun, Nov 6, 2022 at 3:10 PM Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com <mailto:msporny@digitalbazaar.com>> wrote:
> Hi CCG Chairs, VCWG Chairs, and community members,
> 
> As many of you are aware, we have been working on a Verifiable
> Credentials API[1][2] for the better part of two years, meeting
> weekly[3] to move the specification forward. The Traceability
> Interoperability[4] group builds upon parts of this specification and
> specializes it for use with supply chain use cases. We have VC API
> interoperability test suites[5] and it is what drives the
> interoperability mechanism used in the CHAPI VC Issuer Playground[6].
> 
> We currently have 11 implementations[5][6] of the Verifiable
> Credentials API with more in development.
> 
> The W3C Verifiable Credentials Working Group Charter lists this
> specification as a non-normative deliverable[7]. The expectation is
> that it will be published as a Note given that it documents one
> mechanism that the market is using to move Verifiable Credentials from
> Issuers to Holders to Verifiers. It is also expected that the VC API
> will power the VCWG's new test suite.
> 
> The CCG VC API Work Item group has prepared the first publishable
> Draft Note of the specification[8] for publication by the VCWG. This
> version of the specification is a stripped down version that only
> contains VC issuing, VC status changing, VC verifying, and VP creation
> and is what we have consensus to publish via the CCG VC API Work Item
> group.
> 
> Now, here's where things get a bit weird. The CCG VC API Work Item
> group intends to continue to work on the VC API. W3C Notes have zero
> Intellectual Property Release (IPR) protection on them, which means
> that if we hand over the VC API repo to VCWG, we will introduce an IPR
> gap to the work. That is, in this instance, we have better IPR
> protection on it when it's hosted by CCG than if we were to transfer
> it over to the VCWG. What we can do, however, is keep the repo in the
> CCG (so it continues to enjoy IPR protection) and publish an updatable
> fork of the specification via VCWG (we have tested this in the VC API
> group, and it works great). For example, you can view what this looks
> like here (this is a fork of the VC API spec, specific to VCWG, that
> is hosted from my personal Github location):
> 
> https://msporny.github.io/vc-api-vcwg-note/ <https://msporny.github.io/vc-api-vcwg-note/>
> 
> The only thing that would change when we move it to VCWG is that the
> URL would change to:
> 
> https://w3c.github.io/vc-api-note/ <https://w3c.github.io/vc-api-note/>
> 
> As far as action items are concerned:
> 
> 1. W3C CCG Chairs along with W3C VCWG Chairs and Staff will need to
> discuss and determine if this is an acceptable path forward.
> 
> 2. There will need to be a proposal in the CCG to allow VCWG to
> publish snapshots of the VC API via the VCWG.
> 
> 3. There will need to be a proposal in the VCWG to publish the VC API
> as a Draft Note.
> 
> This is a request to the CCG and VCWG Chairs to start that process
> given that 1) we have achieved consensus in the CCG VC API Work Item
> group to do the above, and 2) it is listed as a VCWG charter
> deliverable.
> 
> -- manu
> 
> [1]https://w3c-ccg.github.io/vc-api/ <https://w3c-ccg.github.io/vc-api/>
> [2]https://w3c-ccg.github.io/traceability-interop/draft/ <https://w3c-ccg.github.io/traceability-interop/draft/>
> [3]https://w3c-ccg.github.io/traceability-vocab/ <https://w3c-ccg.github.io/traceability-vocab/>
> [4]https://w3c-ccg.github.io/vc-api-issuer-test-suite/#conformance <https://w3c-ccg.github.io/vc-api-issuer-test-suite/#conformance>
> [5]https://playground.chapi.io/issuer <https://playground.chapi.io/issuer>
> [6]https://w3c-ccg.github.io/meetings/ <https://w3c-ccg.github.io/meetings/>
> [7]https://www.w3.org/2022/06/verifiable-credentials-wg-charter.html#ig-other-deliverables <https://www.w3.org/2022/06/verifiable-credentials-wg-charter.html#ig-other-deliverables>
> [8]https://msporny.github.io/vc-api-vcwg-note/ <https://msporny.github.io/vc-api-vcwg-note/>
> 
> --
> Manu Sporny - https://www.linkedin.com/in/manusporny/ <https://www.linkedin.com/in/manusporny/>
> Founder/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc.
> News: Digital Bazaar Announces New Case Studies
> https://www.digitalbazaar.com/ <https://www.digitalbazaar.com/>
> 
> 
> --
> ORIE STEELE
> Chief Technical Officer
> www.transmute.industries <http://www.transmute.industries/>

----
Ivan Herman, W3C
Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/
mobile: +33 6 52 46 00 43