- From: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
- Date: Tue, 5 Sep 2023 10:01:22 -0400
- To: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
- Cc: W3C VC Working Group <public-vc-wg@w3.org>
On Tue, Sep 5, 2023 at 9:13 AM Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org> wrote: > I believe we should at least sync the list of documents that seem ready to go (DI and the two cryptosuites) with the VDM spec. It just looks funny if the DI spec goes to CR with the VCDM staying behind… Well, the VCDM has a few remaining issues that might be quick to address... or might drag out. The most recent thing is the i18n conversation: https://github.com/w3c/vc-data-model/issues/1264 ... and we have 22 issues for VCDM, where some of them might turn contentious: https://github.com/w3c/vc-data-model/issues?q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+label%3Abefore-CR We're in a holding pattern now w/ DI... we want to tell implementers to start implementing against the spec and the test suites, but we don't want to do that until we go into CR with the specs... so, if we delay, we lose a month to turning the crank for CR... and then possibly another month or two waiting on VCDM. I'll still suggest that waiting in that way is not necessary, we don't need to couple going to CR with these specs together and it'll benefit all of the specs by not doing so. IOW, I think it's easy to explain why DI is going first -- it's ready... and we expect VCDM to follow 1-3 months after, so they're not so far apart that folks should be concerned... and we can explain that in the SoTD if it would help? > I agree that the status list and the jose-cose documents can go with their own pace. +1 Thoughts on the above, Ivan? -- manu -- Manu Sporny - https://www.linkedin.com/in/manusporny/ Founder/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc. https://www.digitalbazaar.com/
Received on Tuesday, 5 September 2023 14:02:05 UTC