Re: [CfC] Call for Consensus: Storage TF resolutions from 2026-07-16 call

P.S. I saw in the notes Manu asking what the IPR regime would be if some or all work items being discussed were "incubated at" DIF. if reusing the existing joint-WG structure, it's actually identical to the CCG IPR regime (DIF's default IPR regime in its charter is called "W3C mode" and defers to whatever the current W3C IPR regime is at time of participation), in that any DIF member participating (by dint of DIF membership agreement) has already granted the same rights and releases whether they're committing to a DIF repo, a CCG repo, or a conversation recorded and minuted by either org. The only apparent difference between a CCG work item and a DIF-CCG joint work item is that joint work items need "joint consensus" (see Section 2 here [^1]), but this is kind of moot in that consensus for both orgs is reached on the same joint calls and email threads, i.e., it just means that participatingDIF and CCG members alike have to reach CCG consensus as distilled and refereed by the chairs, which can be from either org. If all the chairs are on the CCG side, they have no obligation to use DIF-specific consensus-reaching tools like consulting the DIF TSC. In other words, it's the same exact consensus mechanisms and IPR policies in practice, just with DIF members treated as CCG members and invited to the conversation.

P.S.S. I should specify that there is a second request DIF makes of joint work items: stable meeting-room URLs (i.e. https://whereby.com/storage-glue-task-force-biweekly or [https://meet.w3c-ccg.org/zcap-biweekly](https://meet.w3c-ccg.org/zcap-biweeklyweekly) ) so that we can put a link in the recurring event on the DIF calendar.

Speaking of which, is there a meeting later today? Any chance today's could be the first at a stable meeting link?

Thanks,
__bf

[^1]: https://github.com/decentralized-identity/org/blob/main/Org%20documents/WG%20documents/DIF_SDS_WG_Operating_Addendum_v1.pdf

---
bumblefudge
janitor [@Chain Agnostic Standards Alliance](https://github.com/chainagnostic/CASA)
contractable via [learningProof UG](https://learningproof.xyz)
mostly berlin-based

On Friday, July 17th, 2026 at 5:13 PM, bumblefudge von CASA <bumblefudge@learningproof.xyz> wrote:

> Hey Dmitri:
>
> On the DIF side, Secure Data Storage working group is just on "hiatus", it was never disbanded or spun down, and all its work items were joint work items with CCG already, so all DIF asks is to be informed if work is spinning up again and what the meeting cadence is to advertise it to DIF members. Whether meetings are on DIF Zoom links or CCG jitsi links doesn't matter, as long as both [near-identical] IP policies are enforced, and some kind of minutes are published for passive participation and for reading people in who get involved later. EDV spec never hit v1 so shifting or expanding the targeted use-cases is fine as long as it's public-- CfC emails like these are enough for that.
>
> Thanks,
> __bf
>
> ---
> bumblefudge
> janitor [@Chain Agnostic Standards Alliance](https://github.com/chainagnostic/CASA)
> contractable via [learningProof UG](https://learningproof.xyz)
> mostly berlin-based
>
> On Friday, July 17th, 2026 at 12:41 AM, Dmitri Zagidulin <dzagidulin@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> (Minutes from the first Capability-Based Storage Task Force can be found at: https://hedgedoc.socialweb.coop/C8Mx-uH7QdiGbcBxNRaGjg )
>>
>> This TF would like to adopt a "Call for Consensus" notification mechanism, to make explicit that we recognize that participation in sync task force calls is not available to everyone, and we only want to make binding decisions (resolutions) with input from members who could not attend.
>>
>> The following resolutions were passed on today's call, which starts the 7 day waiting period (giving members who couldn't object a chance to object or amend). (These are all fairly non-event items, but we want to start as we mean to go on, CfC wise.)
>>
>> 1. RESOLVED: Create a [task force] work item (CCG repo), Capability-Based Storage Use Cases document (covering usecases for all 3 specs).
>>
>> 2. RESOLVED: Create a [task force] work item using the [Wallet Attached Storage draft](https://w3c-ccg.github.io/wallet-attached-storage-spec/) as input document
>>
>> 3. RESOLVED: Adopt Encrypted Data Vaults spec as a [task force] work item, with consensus from DIF.