- From: CCG Minutes Bot <minutes@w3c-ccg.org>
- Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2023 18:27:49 +0000
Thanks to Our Robot Overlords and Our Robot Overlords for scribing this week! The transcript for the call is now available here: https://w3c-ccg.github.io/meetings/2023-10-17-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/2023-10-17-traceability/audio.ogg ---------------------------------------------------------------- Verifiable Traceability Task Force Transcript for 2023-10-17 Agenda: https://www.w3.org/Search/Mail/Public/advanced_search?hdr-1-name=subject&hdr-1-query=%5BAGENDA&period_month=Oct&period_year=2023&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 Our Robot Overlords Present: Coran, Benjamin Collins, Chris Abernethy, Mahmoud Alkhraishi, Russell H (mesur.io), Orie Steele, TallTed // Ted Thibodeau (he/him) (OpenLinkSw.com), Arun, Ted Thibodeau <mahmoud_alkhraishi> Do you want to call off today? <mahmoud_alkhraishi> sorry audio issues rn Our Robot Overlords are scribing. Chris Abernethy: The only one that objected to being misrepresented with curse words. Benjamin Collins: Yeah oh and then the other thing is it doesn't transfer hardness and if he's not here that might be okay. Benjamin Collins: All right so we're going to go ahead and start with traceability interrupt. Benjamin Collins: https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-interop/pulls Benjamin Collins: https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-interop/pull/597 Benjamin Collins: And go ahead and Link it in chat just in general and let's start from the end so there's five nine five which is open from this it is still in draft this isn't here so I'm going to go ahead and skip over to 597 Christ. Chris Abernethy: So 597 this is the modification of the conformance testing for duplicate items in a request to issue a credential and initially I had it bombing or it's like expecting for the issuer to bomb but after some back and forth we clarify their what we would really like to do is make sure that folks are taking. Chris Abernethy: Approach which is to accept the last specified of a number of duplicate keys so this test now specifies one issue or that's invalid followed by the expected issuer it make sure the test doesn't Bomb It returns a 2001 created and the issuer in the response is the same as the second specified issuer in the request. Benjamin Collins: I'm gonna you know I was realizing that I see her talking let's see if I can try recording again. Our Robot Overlords are scribing. Chris Abernethy: Sure there we go. Benjamin Collins: I'll transcribers here preparing to record the meeting. Benjamin Collins: Okay alright I guess we'll just have to go with Anna Bridge audio recording then. Benjamin Collins: Okay that's for five nights seven it looks like there are three approvals so I guess should we go in merge. Chris Abernethy: That would be. Benjamin Collins: Alright merch and I guess go ahead and delete the branch as well so it deletes awesome. Benjamin Collins: https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-interop/pull/600 Benjamin Collins: And this one is next one is 600 from Russell. Chris Abernethy: I may be able to speak to this I don't recall why this was not merged. Benjamin Collins: I think Corey had feedback on this last week and it looks like Russell accepted the changes and or you approve the changes so we can go ahead and merge this. Benjamin Collins: https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-interop/pull/601 Benjamin Collins: Okay and then the last one on interrupt is also from Chris it looks pretty straightforward. Chris Abernethy: Which one we're talking about 600. Benjamin Collins: 601 Look looks like. Chris Abernethy: 600 Yeah that was a simple thing that I noticed while I was trying to record the meeting last week one of the links was broken. Benjamin Collins: I got to say this is extremely not come controversial. Benjamin Collins: And let's go ahead and merge that and then switching over to traceability vocab or quests. Benjamin Collins: https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-vocab/pulls Benjamin Collins: https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-vocab/pull/889 Benjamin Collins: Three and all of them should be pretty straightforward Miss DPP title or a nine looks like this is a spelling mistake where data carrier was accidentally added into the credential name. Benjamin Collins: 3 Approvals so small typo merging. Benjamin Collins: https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-vocab/pull/890 Benjamin Collins: Delete the branch the next one is at Max Max link to base64 images this is from me I think this was born out by Red Team where you could have an attack that were the image could be extremely long and that would force you to sign it so this is just placing a 500 KB excise on images which are more intended to be smaller icons rather than some. Benjamin Collins: I'm like 10 GB image. Benjamin Collins: So this should be pretty non-controversial and if there's you know issues with the image sizes you know depending on formats we can probably adjust it but I just kind of wanted to set the bar somewhere and then we can move the bar long. <orie> sry im late Chris Abernethy: One thing is I can't seem to see the changes in the agricultural canine card. Benjamin Collins: Oh that's that's going to be a long distance so what happened there was there are two images that were like stupidly big and I had to cut them out like one was an 800 KB image the other one was like a 300 KB image and I made those smaller and so the diff is just going to be that they 64 difference. Benjamin Collins: https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-vocab/pull/891 Benjamin Collins: Okay and the last one for pull request is 891. Benjamin Collins: And this is just. Benjamin Collins: And issue a ct/pet locations in this just kind of more of the same adding constraints around credentials that there's no infinite amount of size that they have to get cap somewhere and this is just something that our test was realized that as they were using the form they could just add an infinite number of array items and so the idea is we would want to cap it somewhere that's above any realistic limit. Benjamin Collins: It and just to keep the data size. Chris Abernethy: I think that makes sense to me I think if anyone would like a different limit we could make a separate PR for that and I think the only person who commented was Mahmoud. Benjamin Collins: And so yeah it's just kind of like bidding you have to set it somewhere and move it up and down but you know it needs to start somewhere. Benjamin Collins: Let's see Christopher to anymore approvals on 891. <orie> link? <orie> I will approve if there is a link : ) Benjamin Collins: I guess not but if we get more approval so I'll go ahead and just merge that out-of-band if there's more than two. Chris Abernethy: Or your mic muted be great if you guys yeah thank you. Benjamin Collins: Okay all right. Benjamin Collins: https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-vocab/pull/891 Orie Steele: Link the thing you want approvals on in the chat sorry if you did that already. Chris Abernethy: Yeah it's a little bit higher above. <coran> Last time you all mentioned to not have questions at the end if possible. Let me know when the appropriate time to discuss them are please. Benjamin Collins: Approvals all right not controversial and alright that's it for poor Quest we went through Trade Center up and we went through Trace vocab for pull request and now we have more people on board so I guess we can go back to a normal call so let's see in terms of agenda items I think Chris you wanted to address some. Benjamin Collins: And then calls. Chris Abernethy: Yeah I just have one pending clothes and it's only like six issues down so I think we'll get to it no problem. Benjamin Collins: Okay so do we just want to go through the standard go through issues on traceability in a row. Benjamin Collins: All right so we're least recently updated. Benjamin Collins: https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-interop/issues?q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+sort%3Aupdated-asc Benjamin Collins: All right let's get started with 496. Benjamin Collins: So 496 is opened by Chris do you want to go ahead and take this one. Benjamin Collins: https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-interop/issues/496 Chris Abernethy: I'm sure this was another one of the things that or a called out I think it's not having issues referenced in the spec so I created this issue for Section 811 it looks like we had some discussion back and forth. Chris Abernethy: This was looking for volunteers in August and then he indicated he did some work and kicked it back to me to re-review so I'm going to go ahead and assign this to myself I have not done any work on this yet but it will be on my radar if it's assigned to me. Benjamin Collins: https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-interop/issues/531 Benjamin Collins: Okay I can see it's been self-esteem and we can go ahead and move on to 531. Benjamin Collins: This is from my mode right yes. <mahmoud_alkhraishi> ywa Benjamin Collins: Marissa is having audio issues do you want to type in chat. <mahmoud_alkhraishi> yes* Benjamin Collins: Okay so having audio issues I'll go ahead and continue talking then we should move CVP specific portfolios example to the appendix and it's like created generic workflow example to make this a more inclusive so this is a pull request or an issue to not make it CBP specific nice opened a PR out of this and the come from Rico were flows are in vocab who's up here and then another ping to. Benjamin Collins: So has this been resolved or search the work to be done. <mahmoud_alkhraishi> still work to be odne i believe <mahmoud_alkhraishi> I will respond on the issue with details <mahmoud_alkhraishi> if not i'll close it Benjamin Collins: Stewart to be done okay can you make any changes of yeah respond on the issue. Benjamin Collins: Okay alright so if that's the case let's go ahead and move on to the. Benjamin Collins: https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-interop/issues/589 Benjamin Collins: Next Issue which is from. Benjamin Collins: It's pretty which is from manip let's see or if you want to comment on this. Benjamin Collins: I can read out. Orie Steele: I think this is discussed last time it's related to the apis BC API stuff. Orie Steele: Also related to the hold it off exchange flows stuff that we are not actually using anymore. Orie Steele: So the comment that this left is still accurate pending input from Maven net and measure. Benjamin Collins: Okay so we're waiting for more comments to be added onto the issue. Benjamin Collins: Do you want to sing any one specific on the issue. Orie Steele: Yes on the issue I think you should ping Mahmood and Chris Christie you the right point of contact to Ping on things that I would have bothered Mike with. Chris Abernethy: I think that's probably the best yet. Orie Steele: Okay so pink my mood pink rest ask for them to comment on it so it says transmitted and measure here so it's really just my mood at this point I would just paying him and say please comment on this. Orie Steele: Yeah if any if he wants to discuss I'm happy to discuss. Benjamin Collins: https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-interop/issues/552 Benjamin Collins: All right we can go doubt that was 589 then ice one is my fight too this is from miss this is make an intro test based on a gs1 credential this is marked raise PR so I think this is just. Benjamin Collins: Nest to make updates to it. Chris Abernethy: Yeah this looks like Mists draft PR. Benjamin Collins: And I will just make a nothing Burger coming just to show that we looked at it and just a touch it. Benjamin Collins: https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-interop/issues/483 Benjamin Collins: Messages should be your pick this is from a mood this is for a 3. Benjamin Collins: Good as close this fixed end 569 so is this good to close now. Mahmoud Alkhraishi: Are you working now awesome. Benjamin Collins: So the last coming on this is it close so we just go ahead and close it then. Mahmoud Alkhraishi: Yeah I'm going to I feel like. Benjamin Collins: https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-interop/issues/574 Benjamin Collins: Content type and hetero Quest next lens 574 which one is from Russell. Russell_H_(mesur.io): This is I have not made progress on this I think the next step is to follow through with that key I made in the Upstream repo because I guess I'm not sure what the status is of that refund looks like there hasn't been work on it the last month or so. Russell_H_(mesur.io): I can I can do that. Orie Steele: Are you you asking about the w3c verifiable credentials working group test Suite Repository. Russell_H_(mesur.io): The VC Jose Costa a test Suite. Russell_H_(mesur.io): Yeah yeah so. Orie Steele: Yeah you're making the same comment you made last time which doesn't seem like there's much activity there so I'm going to make the same comment I made last time that's because you are not contributing their its nest wheat you needs needs contributions I think the working group has progressed documents to the point where we should see updates to that test Suite soon but we could also be the change we want to see in the world on that front I'm happy to help however I can. Russell_H_(mesur.io): Yeah thank you that's my next step then. Chris Abernethy: Is this Russell just to clarify is this another case where we're really talking about is the accept header. Russell_H_(mesur.io): Yes yeah I'll just edit the caption. Chris Abernethy: Sweets thank you. Benjamin Collins: All right so do we want to change the title except to request header no do we want to add any comments in terms of contributing to the Upstream repo. Russell_H_(mesur.io): Yeah I can add a just still needs to be done I think I think things stand like already said as they did. Russell_H_(mesur.io): Yeah that coming. Benjamin Collins: https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-interop/issues/584 Benjamin Collins: Okay and now we get to Chris's pending clothes issue. Chris Abernethy: Yeah this one has been fixed this is done so we can just close it. Benjamin Collins: Okay next one is. Benjamin Collins: https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-interop/issues/482 Benjamin Collins: So we have take the fastest 2021 issue for 82. Chris Abernethy: And I believe we put this off pending VC 2.0 upgrade. Benjamin Collins: Okay and it has the label for VC 2.0 upgrade I think that's okay for now. Benjamin Collins: Is there any comments you want to make or do we just want to run and say that the VC 2.0 upgrade tag spices. Chris Abernethy: Yeah I think we should make a comment just so it doesn't show up in two weeks although there aren't that many issues. Benjamin Collins: Let me see ya then number of issues aren't that many so I kind of would prefer to avoid leaving you know useless comments like pink touched on call. Benjamin Collins: https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-interop/issues/543 Benjamin Collins: Okay so the next one is normatively defining service endpoints. Benjamin Collins: And it's this one from this is Christina right. Benjamin Collins: And looks like Russell this oh this is assigned to it but Russell's Russell said this is working on it okay. Benjamin Collins: So we see oh this is another one still waiting for this. Benjamin Collins: And I guess the work to be done here is just updates the respect document. Benjamin Collins: Okay all right. Benjamin Collins: https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-interop/issues/544 Benjamin Collins: So the next one is who initiates the interaction this one is 544. Benjamin Collins: This is also from Christina and then this is also assigned to this so. Benjamin Collins: Let's see if we can ping this internally and start moving that along. Benjamin Collins: https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-interop/issues/562 Benjamin Collins: And next one is 562. Benjamin Collins: I don't remember. Mahmoud Alkhraishi: Yeah this one was about removing our instruments in Detroit I believe. Mahmoud Alkhraishi: OU Qing Mian I just throw it out there okay I missed that other impression that this was basically in Canada but I can go ahead and get that done. Benjamin Collins: Okay it's Turtle update and then my mind is still assigned. Benjamin Collins: Low JWT and credentials verify. Benjamin Collins: https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-interop/issues/453 Chris Abernethy: Yeah this one's been assigned to me for a while and I have not had a chance to work on it but it is still on my list. Benjamin Collins: Okay looks like there's not a lot of debate on these it just seems like we're waiting for bandwidth. Mahmoud Alkhraishi: Yeah I feel like that's been the case for a little bit on the trains and trucks I'd everything seems pretty straightforward and we've got them down to where we have 20 something right I feel like for the most part they're either already for PR or basically anything from you. Benjamin Collins: The threat any agenda changes we want to switch up for today because it kind of just seems like we're going through each one and say yep yep yep or so anything any discussion or also a rune and Cora are on the call were there any questions that they had the didn't get to last time. Arun: Yeah we do have a few questions I think current will walk through those questions sure hey guys did you guys take a look at 60 to my computer temporarily dropped the the connection on me so the presentation notify request our education and request body did you guys see that issue. Benjamin Collins: https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-interop/issues/602 Chris Abernethy: I see that the end of the list we have not discussed yet. Arun: I'm sorry say again. Mahmoud Alkhraishi: Hey do you want to walk us through it we can go through it. Arun: Is please so the idea behind that one is that when a presentation notifies being sent I would like to kind of have a caller ID I like to know when visual is or What entity is sending me that information or in sending me that request so that when I return the challenge to them one I know who it is I'm sending it to and to once the individual uses that or which some entity utilizes that challenge in the future. Arun: I want to make sure that. Arun: All right that entity is the same one I initially said that challenge to in the first place and I think that would be a good security enhancement just for us to kind of have that second layer of hey these people are the ones who are giving me this challenge back and here are other groups that may be having some issue with their own systems where there may be not getting something back the liking the challenge back the way they need to or not you. Arun: descend to me the way they need to and I can keep track of which instruction. Arun: Or having trouble so that was the the general idea behind that that issue. Arun: Does that make sense. Mahmoud Alkhraishi: Yeah I think one of the things here is. Mahmoud Alkhraishi: Everything on the traceability of Pi is going to be I believe we've removed the did off requirements in general right I don't know if I've missing. Orie Steele: Talked about it I don't think the spec has been updated and the endpoints might still exist in the open API specification as well it's related to the several previous issues we discussed regarding this. Orie Steele: Like for example it's related to the presentations available presentation submission flow like that's the same flow that they're talking about. Mahmoud Alkhraishi: Yeah and I'm looking at the Spectra no one is there. Mahmoud Alkhraishi: I think we've had brought agreement under called to remove that flow and I think it's just one of those things that we haven't gotten around to yet so while I think that would be a welcome addition to the general flow I don't believe this is even the place to do it because I think the spec itself for the did presentation is where we would include this modification rather than in the traceability API. Arun: Are you doing the the content of that notify API be modified so that the information of requester is embedded inside. Mahmoud Alkhraishi: https://w3c-ccg.github.io/vp-request-spec/#query-by-frame <orie> ^ yep <orie> thats the spec where you might make that suggestion Mahmoud Alkhraishi: No no my suggestion is the changes that you're asking for they don't believe they belong in this spec in the first place I think what you're actually asking for is a change to this fact that you are referencing which I want to put in shot right now it's this one and all we're doing is here we are taking it directly from that spec and applying them so unless there's an. Mahmoud Alkhraishi: Upstream change to that Speck. Mahmoud Alkhraishi: I don't think it makes sense for us to have a specific. Mahmoud Alkhraishi: You know anymore. Mahmoud Alkhraishi: Walk down version of it. Mahmoud Alkhraishi: But I'm. Mahmoud Alkhraishi: Be prepared for anyone. Orie Steele: No I think that's accurate I guess the one other thing I might share is the identity credential. Orie Steele: https://github.com/WICG/identity-credential/issues/31#issuecomment-1750610560 Orie Steele: Query language is repo it's also like this repo over here the browser vendors are working on together has comments on the same VP requests back detail you know so you might get good engagement from commenting on that issue 31 on the wick CG. Orie Steele: It's not a thing like we're not in control. Coran: Hey guys I'm really sorry like both our laptops gave up on us and we are really having trouble joining these calls from our laptops we joined in from mobile device but the last as we heard was you did mention like this is not the right place for us to discuss I was curious why why is that because our understanding was. Coran: like VP engine. Coran: Is a way for us to exchange the credentials across parties rights by in this case what we want to make sure is that the person who is requesting so let's notify and submit we understand that incorrect again characters if we are wrong because we have been trying to find this information and there is very little that we can infer based on the available documentation our understanding is that the notify is a way for. Coran: us to informed. Coran: But he died we have a VC and that's why are we started thinking why not the API make provision for other person to know who who is the Notifier. Coran: So the only other option is through the client ID and the secret or maybe any other authentication parameters like only the known set of participants would notify us and based on those odd parameters we are able to figure out who the requester is. Mahmoud Alkhraishi: Yeah so on the the reason why we're saying this is not the right place for it is because we are not in control of the video requests back at all and that specification itself is what we're just applying directly here so if you would like to make a change so while I agree with what you're trying to say if you're trying to. Mahmoud Alkhraishi: Make that change. Mahmoud Alkhraishi: https://github.com/w3c-ccg/vp-request-spec/ Mahmoud Alkhraishi: Go directly to the Veep your prospect think the best way to do it would probably be to open an issue this GitHub I'm still here and then have a thing one of the editors on that stack I believe they do not have a running call but that's fine but I'm sure they're very like I know everybody on that and it wasn't. Mahmoud Alkhraishi: Are all usually very good. Mahmoud Alkhraishi: So what I'm going to suggest is open issue directly on that GitHub repository and communicate with them and then they'll be able to help you out but this is not something that we can we're just applying this fact directly or not actually able to modify it on this call. Coran: Got it on the same topic right since you said you're working on applying that spanked we do have questions on applying the spec as well so in terms of the this the same each day for instance to notify Pi we observed that the API is supposed to send information such as query by example or query by frame we can we find that requirement precisely we have been trying to get what are the. Coran: possible values in how are we supposed to. Coran: Meaning out of it and we are failing to do that probably like we are not finding complete information there are examples though like we don't know how those examples came by. Orie Steele: https://w3c-ccg.github.io/vp-request-spec/#query-by-frame Orie Steele: So I think that's the VP request back is the Vance that's the posted in the chat but it's a different community group work item. Orie Steele: So if you're looking for details regarding that particular specification that work item has its own repository I don't think it has active working group calls could be wrong about that and you can certainly reach out to the mailing list the top of the document any with any questions regarding the specification. Mahmoud Alkhraishi: I will also add that your question about quail eggs up on clear by frame is in that Speck under Section 2 where they talk about you know it does need work I agree with you there's a lot of things that are missing their but I think as I was saying this is one of those things where it's probably best to send out an email to the mailing list and have them respond directly to you. Coran: Got it thanks you thank you for addressing those okay do you actually think that this is the correct body for the rest of our questions than I do I do want to bring up the status as well so the other question is about I know in not with respect to v p but with respect to credential itself there is an API for updating the status right or so one of the question that we are facing is so initially when the. Coran: angel is issued. Coran: It also can have optionally the status parameter inside that but when the status is updated do we need to reissue the status is that how the what the expectation is. Orie Steele: https://github.com/w3c/vc-status-list-2021 Orie Steele: Yeah and in general if you change any of the status bits you'll need to update the status List It string but again that specification is managed by a different group than us so I've shared the link to that status list 2021 and if you look at the the specification you'll see that there's a mailing list for this this best. Orie Steele: Vacation and you can ask. Orie Steele: Questions about that specification on the mailing list although it's weird I don't see it. Orie Steele: No actual verifiable credentials working group document I don't see a mailing list directly listed there. Orie Steele: It should be there should be a mailing list. Orie Steele: For that one as well. Orie Steele: https://github.com/w3c/vc-status-list-2021 Coran: So I mean based on what you just said and based on that status by parameters are you suggesting that we'll have to reshoot every convention that was previously Shield. Orie Steele: Oh no no no just the status list credential so the B string changes for potentially all of the credentials that are in that block every time that b string changes you might reissue but you might also just wait until that status list is requested and then issue once at that point in time you don't need to reissue. Orie Steele: Every revocable. Orie Steele: V credential if it's status changes that's the design is intentionally so that you don't need to do that. Coran: Got a so there is a status list credential that keeps to that needs to be updated all the time and if at all somebody is making a query for this particular credential that we are aware of which has changes status that's the time for us to reissue possibly. Mahmoud Alkhraishi: Is one option as I was saying the other option is to at the time of replication reissue that statuses this will entirely depend on your use case and you expect to manage this you know how often people are retrieving yourselves as potential often you expect to manage it but the straightforward approach is and I mean straight forward as in this is the simplest one to wrap your head around is when. Mahmoud Alkhraishi: When you. Mahmoud Alkhraishi: Credential on a status list you issue a new substance now whether you're doing that when they're trying to fetch it for whether you're doing that the second year ago is in one dacian detail that is entirely up to you is that. <tallted> verifiable credentials working group mailing list -- https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-vc-wg/ Coran: It makes sense. <orie> ^ yep, thats the right list Mahmoud Alkhraishi: No I was asking if that makes sense and you said it does and Ted just shared in the chat they link to the public mailing list for the Republican National working group so feel free to ask any detailed. <orie> the list in the github repo is not correct. Coran: Okay thank you we do have a few more questions I know like I've been asking so many questions but I'm I can say precisely that discourage these answers are really helping us so if you don't mind maybe the next question is with respect to so. Coran: we see like the. Coran: Suffocation as we understand on this call has been like it's continuously being enhanced right is there a point checkpoint for us to say like this this is the final requirement and what we are probably going to say is the bug fixes but not necessarily a requirement change to the specification one thing that we don't want to end up in as like we add some feature or we make some design assumption. Coran: Turns out that design assumption has now changed for some reason. Orie Steele: So the documents in question within this call or community group drafts and in general they should only be cited as work in progress they're entirely unstable and use them at your own risk. Coran: Okay do we have any sort of ETA or any kind of idea when a stable version would is projected to be at least and you always Minds. Orie Steele: No I think if you're looking for stability here you should look at the verifiable credentials working group and its documents those are documents that are in a formal process and they have sort of formal deliverable due dates where they're either making it or they're not by that date and assuming that they make it at that date then they become kind of reliable to implement it that point. Orie Steele: But Community groups and Community groups are very different than formal working groups at w3c study should be cost implementing community group work. Mahmoud Alkhraishi: https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-vocab/issues/217 Mahmoud Alkhraishi: Also I go or is point and I'll also add that we have discussed roadmap Concept in the past and idea of versioning idea of where we want to go I linked an issue where we've had that conversation maybe that'll help you get a rough idea of what at least we were thinking at a point in time I don't know how up to date that thread is I'm not even sure it is but I do but everything. Mahmoud Alkhraishi: That or he's dead. Mahmoud Alkhraishi: Is 100% accurate with regards to what you should rely on and how much you should rely on it right the community group draft is not Final in any shape or form and you should really not be locking down your decisions based on. Coran: So that raises a curious question right so since this call is about interop and what we are trying to build together lays have those agents or Services which could work with each other how do we decide on something like as a as a group or Community like we all agree and let's have this looks like implemented. Mahmoud Alkhraishi: So a big part of that is would encourage you to come join these calls on a regular basis so you can have a lot of input pin how the spec is modified how the API is determined and how we settle on what exactly interrupt means for us this is again an open call them anybody is more than welcome to join as long as they're a member of the ccg the other thing that I. Mahmoud Alkhraishi: I will say is that. Mahmoud Alkhraishi: Regular interoperability tests that are occurring and if this is something that you guys would like to join there is a document that we have set up on steps on how to join right so if this is something that sounds appealing to you way to continuously test your integration a way for you to actually contribute and to help shape the way the spec works please take a look at that and I'm trying to I don't know if anybody else has pulled it up yet I'm trying to play. Mahmoud Alkhraishi: And it right now. Coran: All right I can do we have any other questions so while you're looking up that would you happen to be able to point us toward the sort of source of Truth or with the most up-to-date inputs and outputs are expected for the apis so that we can just stay on top of the lacing plays changes. Mahmoud Alkhraishi: The latest is you will need to run again so this test we that we have running against the traceability interrupt runs Nightwing and it tests against our latest tests for it the reports are generated regularly and I'm trying to find. Mahmoud Alkhraishi: And how to join instructions and then for some reason my bed is gonna let me find it if anybody else has it please stupid Lincoln. Coran: Is this big test suit that suit registration for APS. Mahmoud Alkhraishi: https://w3c-ccg.github.io/traceability-interop/openapi/ Chris Abernethy: https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-interop/blob/main/environment-setup/README.md Mahmoud Alkhraishi: Yes yes also the actual latest spec is the spec that is linked to from the GitHub repo which is the which is one that I have linked right there and Chris thank you for linking the how to set up your environment which is how to get added to these test Suites so our recommendation to make sure that you're always in line with the latest version is to be added to the test Suite where you can see at. Mahmoud Alkhraishi: A minimum of a nightly. Mahmoud Alkhraishi: How complaint you are but my stronger recommendation is to please join these calls regularly and please contribute and help shape what you want the API to look like so that we can build something that helps the most users so this is something that is appealing to you something that you believe will have value please come. Coran: Awesome appreciate the invitation thank you Mama all right thank you guys so much we greatly appreciate all all of your answers. <orie> thanks for joining us Benjamin Collins: I am glad we allocated call time to do that and thanks for ya Samira worry thanks for helping on the calls. Chris Abernethy: Before we sign off can I make a suggestion should we should we add an issue to remove the do dot stuff. Mahmoud Alkhraishi: I believe we definitely should if we don't have one already we should remove it we should. Chris Abernethy: I took a look through and I didn't see it but I may have just missed it. Chris Abernethy: I'm happy to add one. Chris Abernethy: That'd be great. Mahmoud Alkhraishi: So what I'll do Chris is if you've already gone through it once I'll go through it again and if I don't find it I'll just get an issue because it's either really labeled or we just can't find it right. Chris Abernethy: And I'm happy to do the meeting minutes again today. Mahmoud Alkhraishi: Thank you everyone Ben was there anything else that we. Benjamin Collins: No I think that's good I think I just need to make sure to kick everyone stop recording and then make sure I end the call one on the last personal. Chris Abernethy: All right okay I guess.
Received on Tuesday, 17 October 2023 18:27:49 UTC