The Verifiable Claims Task Force

A Task Force of the Web Payments Interest Group

Verifiable Claims Telecon

Minutes for 2016-11-08

Agenda
https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webpayments-ig/2016Nov/0004.html
Topics
  1. Gathering More Use Case Data
Organizer
Richard Varn, Matt Stone, Dan Burnett
Scribe
David Ezell
Present
Richard Varn, Matt Stone, Dan Burnett, David Ezell, Drummond Reed, Jean-Yves Rossi, Dave Longley, Adrian Gropper, Katie Haritos-Shea, Gregg Kellogg, Adam Migus, Rob Trainer, David I. Lehn, Les Chasen, Adam Lake
Audio Log
David Ezell is scribing.

Topic: Gathering More Use Case Data

Richard Varn: We have formerly had to remove use cases, and how we have to add them back in.
Richard Varn: Who can give information on new use cases required?
Drummond Reed: I should be able to have the Evernym product team provide some information about our use cases
Matt Stone: We made the use cases more abstract from the originals. Could we just roll-back the simplifications and refresh the link?
Drummond Reed: Can't speak to that. I think our team could provide information about our use cases. I need to know the form and where to post.
Richard Varn: I think the examples are a good place to start. Send it to Dan, Matt, Richard and we'll publish it.
Richard Varn: Google doc is better than what i said
Drummond Reed: We had a running Google-doc that we were collaborating on. Can you share that reference?
Matt Stone: We were hoping to call an AC vote in early december. So next week we should review less-abstract use cases, right?
Matt Stone: I think one Google doc would be easiest.
Richard Varn: Who should coordinate?
Richard Varn: Who did it last time?
Dan Burnett: Shane coordinated use cases last time
Matt Stone: I need to figure out how to share this document.
Dave Longley: ^New blank Google doc for use cases
Adrian Gropper: I think the physician credentials use case is something I should add.
Matt Stone: Yes, absolutely. We want to focus the next deliverable on concrete and immediate use cases, not too much blue-sky.
Adrian Gropper: Right now to sign a script for a controlled substance, they need a fob. They might need three fobs is they work in three places. Is correcting this problem something we could address.
Adrian Gropper: DEA audits at the institutional level, so each institution has to issue a fob - there's no standard.
Matt Stone: Same DEA number, but different fob?
Adrian Gropper: Yes.
Drummond Reed: KYC use cases have been talked to death? Or is it something we want?
Richard Varn: W3C staff definitely wants that use case.
Dave Longley: Concerns from AC are "what are the real world use cases".
Richard Varn: Another one mentioned was for retailers on loyalty programs.
Richard Varn: Another was for c-stores for age verification
Dave Longley: These kinds of use cases are very important for anyone advocating.
Richard Varn: Yes. travel would be good as we have not had one before that i know of
Drummond Reed: Do you want travel use cases? Passports, emergency contact?
Dave Longley: It's important to capture, but feedback from companies directly impacted by the work is the most important.
Richard Varn: Pearson and ETS will submit a joint one
Richard Varn: Yes.
Matt Stone: Players in the education space should contribute. Can we get Pearson and ETS to submit?
Richard Varn: Yes we'll do that for education. One reason we'll do that is we don't want vendor lock-in at any level of the process.
Katie Haritos-Shea: I will be happy to add an Accessibility use case for attesting privately that a person with disabilities meets the legal requirement of disabled to enable them to access public services
Richard Varn: Have we covered this vendor lock-in adequately?
Richard Varn: We will add the problem of vendor lock in to the education case
Richard Varn: Ok. will do.
Matt Stone: It's a useful lens to put on the education use cases. There are always many players/providers, and consistency is problematic. Finance (payments) may have the same problems.
Richard Varn: Got it.
Richard Varn: System agnosticism across systems as well as within sectors is important
Matt Stone: +1
Dave Longley: Work would help create an interoperable way to express and verify so that it works in many different situations. It's a key way this work is new and different.
Adrian Gropper: Parties in education and healthcare are very diverse, and federation has failed in those cases.
Matt Stone: +1 To agropper
Richard Varn: Is it also true that federation is not practical across sectors?
Richard Varn: We need a retailer
Matt Stone: So there is a google doc, is it enough to have one explicit case for education, healthcare, and KYC as the seminal use cases?
Drummond Reed: I agree that these cases need to be compelling. I'll try to get our guys to contribute those use cases.
David Ezell: Working on getting merchant use case. May not have by Friday. Merchant ucs are not the same as payment UCs. I will send a merchant UC this week. [scribe assist by Dan Burnett]
Drummond Reed: Would like to have a template that we can use to fill use case content. [scribe assist by Matt Stone]
Drummond Reed: Drummond asks if someone can seed the document with one or two use cases in the format that the group recommends, as then we can try to make sure the others follow that same structure.
Matt Stone: Can we steal from existing use case docs? A template that the AC might recognize?
Dave Longley: ^Existing use caes
Dave Longley: Cases
Drummond Reed: A template would be perfect, especially if you already have one.
Matt Stone: I'll take one of these examples after the call see what's useful and move it over to googledoc.
Matt Stone: Work we did last summer was pretty good. Hate to reinvent anything.
Dave Longley: We just need to get people to step up to say "xyz is important to my company" and demonstrate how the work is relevant.
Matt Stone:
Matt Stone: That begs the question - how do we actually respond? For those of us who represent specific organizations, we are looking to begin work on certain use cases.
Gregg Kellogg: +1 To dlongley, it reinforces the work already done to reference existing use cases.
Dan Burnett: +1 As well. The work has already been done. Now we just need the direct link between organizations and UCs that are crucial to them.
Dave Longley: Nate's email was convincing to the the AC reps about how this work helps. This kind of testimonial is important. Explaining how this work will help, whereas other work has not will really move us forward.
Dave Longley: Nate's response: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webpayments-comments/2016Nov/0017.html [scribe assist by Matt Stone]
Matt Stone: So we can use this response as a template.
Dan Burnett: Don't respond to that one, but use it as a template.
Dave Longley: "David Ezell once explained that you're proposing essentially a new architectural layer to glue them together. That sounds promising, but it's not obvious to me as a non-specialist how this relates to the architecture diagram in the VC WG proposal."
David Ezell: Mike Champion mentioned something in a thread that I had explained to him. I had called him directly. I gave Mike concrete examples of what we need and why. The AC reps want to know why SAML didn't work for our requirements (or how it didn't solve 100% of our requirements). As a group we know what we are talking about. [scribe assist by Dan Burnett]
Dave Longley: +1 To Richard
Richard Varn: Want to reinforce - practical, not technical responses may carry the day. The problem remains that there's no overall header that says "this is a claim, and here's how it's organized." We need one way to present it and share it.
Matt Stone: +1 Richard
Richard Varn: I think that's our primary mission. Even though we're competitors, we want all claims from everyone to be able to be verified.
Matt Stone: To add to that - the essential ingredient we're adding to the solution space, we're giving control to the original earner, and acknowledging that the federated approach hasn't worked in the solution space.
Richard Varn: +1
Dave Longley: +1 To Matt
David Ezell: Web servers was another place where federation did not work [scribe assist by Richard Varn]
Richard Varn: I think we can call this item done. Anything we didn't do?
Richard Varn: Other agenda items?
Matt Stone: Can we say what's happening in the next 3-5 days?
Richard Varn: 4 People will submit sections to the google doc with concrete reasons why they are challenged with current systems and looking forward to VC.
...: also in the next 3 to 4 days, all the group should look at those and be prepared to approve or disapprove at our next meeting.
Matt Stone: Contributors use explicit use cases? Stone, Varn, Drummond and who?
Drummond Reed: Yes, I'm one of them (although I'm going to delegate it within the Evernym product group)
...: also find and recirculate Phil Archer's email and make sure expectations are understood.
David Ezell: I'm the 4th volunteer.
Matt Stone: +1 Dezell
Matt Stone: Brian is next scribe. Next meeting is one week from today, eastern (15 Nov).
Richard Varn: Suggest we won't meet Thanksgiving week.
Drummond Reed: Agreed not to meet Thanksgiving week
No meeting 22 Nov.