Re: Event Updated: VCWG Meeting

On Wed, Feb 19, 2025 at 6:40 AM Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org> wrote:
> Some input to the main agenda item on "path to proposed Rec". My goal is to make the meeting as efficient as possible.

Hey Ivan, I've prepped Proposed Rec static snapshots for a March 20th
publication date for the specs I'm the primary Editor on: VCDM v2.0,
DI, ECDSA, EdDSA, BSL, and CID. There are still a handful of editorial
PRs that might or might not make it in; if they don't make it in, we
can ship  those editorial issues in the maintenance release.

> - See [1] for what I see at this moment for the implementation reports. There are some gaps that must be filled before we take any action (especially with the JSON Schema). THIS IS THE MOST URGENT ACTION!

Yes, that's an issue.

> - See [2] for the approval request. Even if you have already seen it, look at it again, especially [3]; I have gone through the horizontal reviews' part and added some extra information into the request. Unless I misunderstood or missing something, we can go ahead with that section imho.

I've taken a look and it looks accurate, AFAICT.

> - See also [4] for some more problems to be settled before going to a PR request. Some of those are now obsolete, in particular my remark in point 3 on what votes are necessary; our current charter[5] disallows class 4 changes, so no action is needed there. Most of the other remarks are editorial, except for the implementation reports, see [1]

Agree.

> - [6] lists a number of actions that must be taken with the context, schema, and vocabulary files. While most of the actions are on me (except for the update on w3id.org) we have to agree on the details. These ought to be done before we publish a PR, but it is o.k. to do them while we are waiting for the decision on the transition request.

We should do this before Proposed Rec so if something goes wrong we
can adjust before Proposed Rec (I can't think of what would, but I'd
like to get a few test suite runs in just to make sure). Let's start
on this as soon as we get a positive vote to go to PR from the WG.

> - As for the possible publication date. If all ducks are in a row, we can submit the approval request[2] before Friday the 7th of March, hopefully the 3rd or the 4th. I have talked to Philippe, and he said that he and Yves Lafon (the two reviewers of the transitions) would need several hours to review the request for 8 different specs. Ie, we cannot reasonably expect an approval before the 14th of March, which puts the first reasonable publication date to the 20th of March. (Reviews are done on Fridays, publications happen on Tuesdays and Fridays.)

I (luckily) set the publication date to March 20th for the documents
I'm handling the proposed rec for, so we're good to go there. I still
need to link check those docs.

> Note that we really really should have the submissions "in" by the 7th. Based again on the discussions with Philippe, the closer we get to April the more of his (and Yves') energy will be taken up by the preparation of the AC meeting. This may lead to (long!) delays; we do not want that!

+1 to that, thank you for front-running the process needs, Ivan!

-- manu

-- 
Manu Sporny - https://www.linkedin.com/in/manusporny/
Founder/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc.
https://www.digitalbazaar.com/

Received on Wednesday, 19 February 2025 14:17:19 UTC