- From: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
- Date: Sun, 20 Nov 2022 11:05:07 -0500
- To: W3C Credentials CG <public-credentials@w3.org>
On Sat, Nov 19, 2022 at 11:36 PM Tobias Looker <tobias.looker@mattr.global> wrote: > It would certainly appear that there are different interpretations of what the charter permits. I don't read it as allowing publishing of the entire VC API definition and protocol as a note. Seems that the W3C VCWG Staff Contact's read on the current charter is different than yours; it seems that we're fine to publish as a Draft Note (or perhaps just an Editor's Draft). Let's see what the W3C Process team comes back with as a definitive answer. > Its not the threat of active mis-representation by VC API proponents that I see as being the most damaging, it is the passive risk. For example participants in the wider market that mistakenly view the published note as an API and protocol definition that has been evolved and blessed by the VC WG and therefore make a decision to implement on that basis. There is a "Status of the Document" section that clearly states that 1) it is not a W3C Standard, and 2) the specification is highly experimental and changing rapidly and implementation in non-experimental systems is discouraged unless individuals are regularly participating in the weekly meetings. Any publication as a Draft Note would contain similar language at the top of the document: https://w3c-ccg.github.io/vc-api/#sotd -- manu -- Manu Sporny - https://www.linkedin.com/in/manusporny/ Founder/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc. News: Digital Bazaar Announces New Case Studies (2021) https://www.digitalbazaar.com/
Received on Sunday, 20 November 2022 16:05:56 UTC