- From: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
- Date: Sat, 21 Nov 2015 14:17:24 -0500
- To: Nick Shearer <nshearer@apple.com>
- CC: public-webpayments-ig@w3.org
On 11/17/2015 11:52 AM, Nick Shearer wrote: > Forgive me if this has already been answered elsewhere on the > Credentials CG, but I am wondering how a task force under the WPIG > would not have the same presumption of non-neutrality? The theory goes that since the Credentials CG has already worked through defining the problem, use cases, input technologies, and is working on a technical solution that the group carries a certain bias on the problem space and how to solve the set of problems it has identified. Since the WPIG has not done this work, and is looking at the problem statement again to get broader input, it's postulated that the WPIG does not have the same set of biases as the Credentials CG. At least, that's the theory as I don't know who raised the concern. The Credentials CG rejects the notion that it can't be unbiased when discussing the problem statement (as it has actively ferreted out alternative viewpoints and integrated them into the work over the past year). In any case, it seems like the least controversial thing to do based on input from all sides would be to create a Verifiable Claims Task Force operating out of the WPIG that is open to all that are interested in the space. -- manu -- Manu Sporny (skype: msporny, twitter: manusporny, G+: +Manu Sporny) Founder/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc. blog: Web Payments: The Architect, the Sage, and the Moral Voice https://manu.sporny.org/2015/payments-collaboration/
Received on Saturday, 21 November 2015 19:17:50 UTC