Re: Chartering work has started for a Linked Data Signature Working Group @W3C

On Mon, 24 May 2021 at 15:41, Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com> wrote:

> Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote:
> > I would greatly appreciate a discussion of the possible flaws in that
> > document.  This discussion does not appear to be happening, which I find
> > worrisome.
>
> Ok, then let's have this discussion, even if it takes weeks or months to
> come
> to any sort of conclusion. I don't want any accusation that we didn't
> discuss
> these things (even though variations of these discussions have happened in
> other forums over the years).
>
> I will assert that these sorts of discussions should happen in a W3C WG; as
> that's the purpose of a W3C WG. That they're happening w/o involving the
> other
> communities that have been using these specifications and technologies is
> problematic.
>
> Before we have this discussion, however, I'd like to understand what a
> resolution to the discussion would look like to you, Peter, Melvin, and
> Dan.
>

Please don't make email from me a precondition from engaging with Peter's
questions. If the issues have all been hashed out in previous fora, links
would be a good way to answer.

What I would like to see is a high-profile public call for review of this
*draft* charter from W3C (e.g. blog, mail to security lists, IETF liaisons
etc.) - blog post, tweet etc. Review shouldn't be happening on a semweb
list.

Dan


> Specifically, if we note any issues that are of concern for Linked Data
> Proofs
> in the document as issues (using language that you draft), and it's clear
> that
> there is a path forward (or the feature could be dropped without
> endangering
> the entire specification) would you be willing to move forward with the
> document as an *input* to the WG?
>
> -- manu
>
> --
> Manu Sporny - https://www.linkedin.com/in/manusporny/
> Founder/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc.
> blog: Veres One Decentralized Identifier Blockchain Launches
> https://tinyurl.com/veres-one-launches
>
>
>