Re: [w3ctag/design-reviews] Verifiable Credentials Data Model 1.0 (#343)

> 1. This is exciting work, and we can see the kind of ecosystem you're trying to build – but we are struggling to understand its relationship to the web. Your charter suggests you'll be creating some vocabularies – presumably those will operate in line with the existing web technologies? What are you expecting those to be?

Yes, the core vocabulary will be the Verifiable Credentials Data Model v1.0 vocabulary, a working version of which can be found here:

https://www.w3.org/2018/credentials/


Note that this is a base layer vocabulary that is expected to be extended by particular market verticals (those market verticals, specifically education, government, and supply chain) are participating in the VCWG. More on that below...

Did the answer above address  your question, @hadleybeeman?

> 2. Similarly, the Verifiable Claims [use cases](https://w3c.github.io/vc-use-cases/) doc (good, clear document, by the way!) implies a number of implementors to make the use cases work. Can you give us a sense of what products/services you would expect those to be, to illustrate this? It looks like you're not looking at browser vendors -- which is fine, to be clear! -- but it might help us to understand what existing web technologies/architecture you're planning to work with.

To provide a concrete example of a real world deployment... a number of US Supply Chain companies (importers, manufacturers, and retailers), along with the US Federal Government, are utilizing the technology to modernize old paper based processes using Verifiable Credentials. See the US Capitol Hill testimony for direct references to support of Verifiable Credentials at W3C (UPS was also a part of the testimony):

https://youtu.be/J7aCUM2RfJA?t=35m25s


An article outlining how Verifiable Credentials are being used can be found here:

https://www.americanshipper.com/news/cbp-planning-blockchain-tests-for-trade-compliance


We also shared who some of these organizations are under W3C Member Confidentiality at last year's W3C TPAC (see slide 9 -- yes, it's for the DID WG, but the reason they want the DID WG is because almost all of them are using Verifiable Credentials and they want to tie them to Decentralized Identifiers):

https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-ac-forum/2018OctDec/att-0007/W3C_DID_WG_Proposal_-_W3C_Member_Confidential.pdf


Another concrete example (that's public, there are many that are wrapped under NDA right now) is the Canadian Province of British Columbia's Verified Organization Network:

https://vonx.io/


Also note that education organizations such as Credly and BrightLink are also involved (to issue VC's for learning use cases).

The thread that ties all of these use cases and organizations together is the Web. They use websites to issue, store, and present Verifiable Credentials. Many are defining Web-based/HTTP APIs for the protocols (work continues in the W3C Credentials Community Group on that part, since larger organizations at W3C were successful in constraining the charter to only work on data model and not protocol or signature mechanisms).

Does that provide enough background, @hadleybeeman? 

> 3. It would be helpful for us to see the resolution of [those issues](https://github.com/w3c/vc-data-model/issues/created_by/nadalin) that @nadalin (and/with? @travisleithead) have filed.

The VCWG is currently working through the large amount of issues filed by Microsoft and will be doing so for the next 3-4 weeks.

@hadleybeeman there is much more I could say, but am limited by time and github comments. Happy to have a recorded/scribed conversation to elaborate on any further questions to help in the W3C TAG review. There is *a lot* to what is going on wrt. Verifiable Credentials deployment and usage around the world.

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/343#issuecomment-479559417