Re: W3C Process for Registries

Christopher,

Not sure if anyone ever responded.  A few points below.

Jeff

On 4/16/2019 3:23 PM, Christopher Allen wrote:
> I lurk on the W3C Process CG, but do not actively read all the email, 
> nor have I attended more than about one call and part of one F2F.
>
> I am co-chair of the W3C Credentials CG https://w3c-ccg.github.io 
> (with Kim & Joe, cc'ed above), which successfully spun out the 
> Verifiable Claims WG a few years ago (hopefully soon to be a CR!) and 
> is now spinning out a new Decentralized Identifiers WG (again, 
> hopefully soon).
>
> We are one of the most active W3C community groups, with regular 
> 20-30+ person calls weekly for several years. We have a large number 
> of community work items that we are in progress on. Some will be CG 
> reports, some are incubation for future potential WGs, others are 
> intended as advisory, and at least one is ultimately intended for the 
> IETF.
>
> As W3C Community Groups don't terminate (are we "Evergreen"?)

Not really.  CG reports have no formal "recommendation" from W3C.  If a 
CG wants its report to be recommended, then it needs to go to the REC track.

By contrast, the Evergreen proposal intends that such specs be formally 
recommended by W3C.  If we create an Evergreen track, that could become 
an alternate way for CG specs to be recommended by W3C.


> both the VCWG and the nascent DIDWG have asked us to be the home for 
> ongoing registries that both specifications need. We have created 
> lightweight processes for these that seem to be working reasonably 
> well so far.

Indeed!


>
> We also are supporting a number Digital Verification CG items 
> https://github.com/w3c-dvcg tasks (sort of a subgroup of our own), 
> where cipher and proof suites are shared, which also tend to be 
> evergreen, though our own processes for these are current lagging (a 
> shortage of cryptographers and security engineering time and people.)
>
> My understanding is that others at W3C have been discussing other 
> processes for handling registries and lists, and also items like 
> cryptosuites that need to be evergreen. As I don't read all the W3C 
> Process email, I'd like to be specifically informed a week or more in 
> advance if there any W3C Process meetings with that topic on the agenda.

The W3C Process CG plans to go to bi-weekly meetings.  I suggest you 
subscribe to that CG's mailing list (if you have not done so already) 
and then you'll get the agendas.  The Chair, David Singer, is very good 
about getting out the agenda.


>
> In such a meeting I can at minimum inform people of what 
> registries/lists the CCG is hosting now, our current processes, and 
> share my thoughts on how/if registries/lists could be handled differently.
>
> Thanks!
>
> -- Christopher Allen
>
> P.S. I'm on PDT which makes 7am calls rather grueling as I have Asia 
> clients who always want 7pm calls. I don't know if you have any 
> flexibility on call times.
>

Received on Wednesday, 24 April 2019 23:09:40 UTC