- From: CCG Minutes Bot <minutes@w3c-ccg.org>
- Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2022 22:23:44 +0000
Thanks to Our Robot Overlords and ben_transmute for scribing this week! The transcript for the call is now available here: https://w3c-ccg.github.io/meetings/2022-10-25-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/2022-10-25-traceability/audio.ogg ---------------------------------------------------------------- Verifiable Traceability Task Force Transcript for 2022-10-25 Agenda: https://www.w3.org/Search/Mail/Public/advanced_search?hdr-1-name=subject&hdr-1-query=%5BAGENDA&period_month=Oct&period_year=2022&index-grp=Public__FULL&index-type=t&type-index=public-credentials&resultsperpage=20&sortby=date Organizer: Orie Steele, Mike Prorock, Mahmoud Alkhraishi Scribe: Our Robot Overlords and ben_transmute Present: Ben Transmute, nis, Russell Hofvendahl (mesur.io), PaulDietrich GS1, Mahmoud Alkhraishi, TallTed // Ted Thibodeau (he/him) (OpenLinkSw.com), vivien, Ted Thibodeau, Orie Steele Our Robot Overlords are scribing. Ben_Transmute: We were doing manual spread now. Ben_Transmute: Oh that's right but for the audio. <ben_transmute> Nis: welcome to weekly trace-vocab interop <ben_transmute> Nis: make sure you sign the contributor agreement <ben_transmute> Nis: today is vocab week, which means we will start with trace-vocab <ben_transmute> Nis: then we will switch to trace-interop PR's <ben_transmute> Nis: and then back to trace-vocab issues ben_transmute is scribing. https://www.githubstatus.com/incidents/83yg2mk1cx3c?utm_ts=1666718393 https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-vocab/pulls Ted Thibodeau: Github is having issues with pull requests and issues -- https://www.githubstatus.com/incidents/83yg2mk1cx3c?utm_ts=1666718393 https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-vocab/pull/599 Ben: This issue is for changing the certificate postfix to credential based on customer feedback Nis: we have three approvals, any objections? Nis: merging pull 599 https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-vocab/pull/597 Nis: Russell you have 597 Russell: This creates organic inspection certificate and handful of related schemas Russell: it took a lot of research but was straightforward to implement Russell: I can add a pull request for the new credential conventions from the previous PR <pauldietrich_gs1> one comment. seems you have to dig in pretty far to see the USDA organic info. There are several other kinds of organic certification Nis: next we have 598 from Russell https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-vocab/pull/598 Russell: this is a wrapper for organic inspection, there is a review after the inspection which references the onsite inspection Nis: any objections to merging 598? Nis: Merging 598 https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-vocab/pull/600 Nis: next one is 600 from "me" Nis: what is does it update steel and eCommerce workflows to add links to the description in the respec document Nis: Any objections to merging 600? https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-vocab/pull/601 Nis: Russell the last PR is 601 Russell: I submitted this very recently, will give people time to review it Nis: We only have one approval, we can leave it for next week Nis: PR 600 is still in CI, will come back to it Nis: we have been through the PR's for trace-vocab, moving over to interop Nis: Paul you are queued Paul: for the organic certification, is that USDA, applicable to california and other teritories? <orie> Great question Russell: I think it mostly USDA, I can follow up with Mike to ask about Paul: When there are specific names available, we might want to make that specific to point out the authority Orie Steele: Messur has does a good job on FSMA, we would take a similar approach? Russell: So the prefix would be USDA organic? Orie Steele: If the intention is to make it specific to an authority, we would want to convey that Paul: In the case of the US government, it would probably only need USDA Orie Steele: The objective is not for it to be only in US, but to be clear where it is meeting the requirements for governments Russell: yeah. this is for foreign imports and international processes Russell: I will make that change and ask Mike about it https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-interop/pull/451 Nis: let's move onto PR's on trace-interop Nis: first one is 451 and this is from me Nis: this is addressing the different kinds of presentations that we support and it was outdated Nis: whether it has been properly addressed it up for you to decide Nis: we have one approval, otherwise we will need to give it more time Nis: Any objections to merging 451? Nis: there is one more, this is from Isaac, he is not on the call Nis: this is about conflicting tests on conformance and interop Nis: who approved it, can you elaborate on how it was done? Ben: Chris is not here, normally we would hear from him Nis: He's only touched the workflow instance join, which makes it isolated Nis: It has three approves, any objects to merging 452? Nis: Merging 452 Russell: Separate thing, i was looking at changing organic certificate to credential Russell: Would we want to change CTPAT Certificate to CTPAT credential? https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-vocab/issues?q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+sort%3Aupdated-asc Ben: No, I think that's the specific name of the credential in this case, similar to Certification of Origin https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-vocab/issues/393 Nis: moving onto issues. The first is follow up with QDT Nis: My suggestion there was to close that, the question is was QDT help us with various steel tests? Nis: but the answer is "no", it's about to units and nothing else Nis: my recommendation is to close out that ticket and follow up tickets Nis: Orie this is your ticket Orie Steele: We can close it on the call right now Ted Thibodeau: +1 Close 393 ... even better if could get a better title https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-vocab/issues/594 Nis: And then we should talk about 594 <orie> ISO : ( <orie> impossible to read the tests. Nis: What I then did was poked around where the standard bodies that do these tests, and also ISO https://www.iso.org/obp/ui/#iso:std:iso:6892:-1:ed-3:v1:en Nis: If you follow this link <orie> have to pay for them... but they are defined by ISO. Nis: the link resolves to something reasonable <orie> better than anywhere else <orie> I am a +1 to refering to ISO when we can. Nis: We should not action on that any further, but pointing out a different source for the previous issue <orie> despite not loving ISO's transparency model. https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-vocab/issues/204 Nis: And the final one was measurement, which were related Nis: I suggest we use the UN measurement, which is pretty applicable to what we need Orie Steele: I agree, I previously made measurements from schema.org, we should use the UN instead of schema.org Nis: How do we move the issue forward? Orie Steele: Show the nquads as they are used today, and then show the updated nquads Orie Steele: And if people like that we can move the issue forward Orie Steele: That's how we should approach any semantic example issues <orie> We can use v.jsld.org to help argue on the information representations if we want. https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-vocab/issues?page=1&q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+sort%3Aupdated-asc Nis: wanted to bring those up first since i spent time on them https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-vocab/issues/313 Nis: issue 313. Feels like we discussed this not long ago Nis: Suggestion is to bump this up to 0.1 so we're not 0.0, and then there is talk about roadmaps Nis: This one is pending PR any comments on 313? Ben: I volunteer to be assigned to this https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-vocab/pull/600 Nis: next is 350, which is what I'm addressing on PR 600 Nis: I suggest we merge 600 and then close 350 Nis: okay, merging 600 and closing issue 350 <orie> 600 looks awesome! https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-vocab/issues/353 Nis: Next is issue 353 Nis: Orie this is your issue AWS test suite Orie Steele: I can give an update on this, this test suite has continued to gain update Orie Steele: The VS JWT and Json web signature 2020 tests are likely to be made out of date by the W3C verifiable credentials working group Orie Steele: I think this is better handed with the verifiable credential test suite with examples https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-vocab/issues/344 Orie Steele: And i think the complicated examples in the verifiable credential working group would be beneficial, so i will add a comment on the issue Nis: 344 Orie this is you Orie Steele: So we're looking at 344 Orie Steele: This is related to ongoing conversations in the verifiable credentials working group about ongoing expansions Orie Steele: The proposal in the verifiable credential working group is taking about how undefined terms are handled Orie Steele: If verifiable credentials do this for ts, then we wouldn't need to do it Orie Steele: We should link this issue to them to get visibility on it https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-vocab/issues/521 Orie Steele: I don't think there is an action item on our side, we can see how the working group resolves this problem Nis: Next is 521, this is also from Orie Orie Steele: Traceable presentations recipient, we don't have a way to represent the recipient Orie Steele: The suggestion here is to add a recipient Orie Steele: Will cross link this to the working group https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-vocab/issues/526 Nis: next is 526, from Ted Ted Thibodeau: I think it's ready for PR and hopefully self evident Ted Thibodeau: We need a diff and then an intelligent choice of which changes are applied to the readme https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-vocab/issues/357 Nis: Next is 357 <paul_dietrich_gs1> present- https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-vocab/issues/366 Ben: This is for having the images be paired with the credential, and updating the CD for this Nis: Next issue is 366 workflow examples to demonstrate events Orie Steele: Paul just dropped off, this would have been something for him to comment on https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-vocab/issues/369 <tallted> tangent -- who maintains the ccgbot? it should never do a `present-` because the minutes don't record "partial" attendance; you're either here for (some of) the meeting, or you're not (at all). Ben: I think the action item here is to remove these Ben: We will make an ticket internally to address that https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-vocab/issues/389 Nis: Next one is from Mike <orie> TallTed I think Manu or MikeP. Nis: Russell do you know anything about this Russell: This is a priority that I am working on Nis: Russell, can you assign yourself to this issue? Orie Steele: I already assigned you, can I add a 'Ready for PR' label to this? Russell: Yes, that makes sense https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-vocab/issues/399 Nis: Next is 399, Build context as a github/npm package Orie Steele: Do we want to do this? Ben: I dont think we should publish this, it's a script for a niche use-case https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-vocab/issues/528 Ben: And if people want that script they can grab the script from this repo, adpapt and run it Nis: Issue 528 is about Entity.entityType Ben: We defined this, so it should be addressed https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-vocab/issues/527 Nis: Moving on to 527 Ben: Right now our JSON-LD does not handle oneOf from schemas Ben: I'm not sure how we would handle this in @context Ted Thibodeau: It seems to be relevant, and rather than fixing our JSON-LD predecessor to address the construct, we're updating our schemas to not use the construct Ben: What would the shape of the `@context` need to look like is something I don't understand Ted Thibodeau: We had existing examples for JSON schema, oneOf does not exist in @context Ted Thibodeau: It's kind of like domain and range and domainIncludes and rangeIncludes, kind of <orie> sry, i had to afk <orie> randomly https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-vocab/issues/527 Ben: To support JSON-LD oneOf in JSON-SCHEMA, what would the @context look like? Orie Steele: I don't know, i think this is a case where until you create it Orie Steele: The primary guidance we leave on this issue is: if you can implement this is your code and suggest a solution Ted Thibodeau: I'm concerned with throwing out a language feature because the tooling does not support it Orie Steele: +1 Ted Ted Thibodeau: Anyone can add information on the issue so that we can have a better handle on this when it comes up again Nis: This is similar to the case of `allOf` that I also want to use Nis: We're using json-schema and JSON-ld which means we need to use the lowest common denominator Orie Steele: +1 Ted, I really like the domain and range comment/ <orie> we need that on the issue. <orie> thats a hint at a path forward Ted Thibodeau: I think bringining allOf complicates the use-case in a single way. If you use it then any any entity that is included also is a member of the class Orie Steele: I agree, need to have time to build it for how to implement it properly Ted Thibodeau: I can help with brain storming, but I am not a code Orie Steele: If you get on the issue and rant about domain and range and how it relates to anyOf and allOf, and I might be able to parse that <orie> We need domain and range comments on https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-vocab/issues/527 Nis: can i assign you on the issue? Ted Thibodeau: Okay, that's no problem at all <orie> Thank you! Nis: that was great, thank you for coming Russell: I can post minutes
Received on Thursday, 27 October 2022 22:23:44 UTC