Manu, May want to collaborate on that with Kimberly. She has already pulled a lot together for a CCG response, with input from myself and Harrison. Mike Prorock mesur.io On Fri, Mar 17, 2023, 13:47 Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com> wrote: > On Fri, Mar 17, 2023 at 2:46 PM Mike Prorock <mprorock@mesur.io> wrote: > > Lots of good discussion and interest from many parties regarding > feedback on making sure VCs are covered in applicable areas. > > For those of you that are short on time, but want to add your voice to > something: I'm planning on authoring something from the perspective of > /some/ CCG and VCWG members with the ability to have a list of > signatures at the end of the document. > > The goal with the document would be to be non-divisive and general in > the feedback (to collect the most signatures): "We think that the VC > Data Model and Issuer-Holder-Verifier model should be included in > these documents given that it is a global standard, being deployed in > pilots and production, is awesome for reasons X, Y, and Z, etc. etc. > etc." The message is intended to be positive and speak only to VCs > (not disparage or speak to other technologies in the space). The > message also will not be "this is the position of the VCWG or CCG", > but rather, "Here is a list of organizations and individuals, the > professional societies they're a part of (CCG, VCWG, DIF, ToIP, OASIS, > ISO), and a show of general support for including more about VCs in > NIST Special Publications". > > Just a heads up that, given NIST personnel showed up to our meetings > and asked for our feedback as a community, we should try to provide it > to return the favor for the time they shared with us. > > -- 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 Friday, 17 March 2023 22:16:59 UTC