Meeting minutes
Carsten_Stöcker: Yes.
Ivan_Herman: Hey, good morning. No, good afternoon.
Carsten_Stöcker: How are you doing? How's life in us?
Ivan_Herman: It's okay. I mean, nothing particular I wonder I mean is this the note taker that makes the recording or…
Carsten_Stöcker: Excellent. Firefly. I regret.
Ivan_Herman: is it something else?
Carsten_Stöcker: No, I don't know. I didn't set it up, but I guess that's a note taker.
Ivan_Herman: Very few ro you are muted Where are you?
Carsten_Stöcker: Yeah. Hi, Cowing. Yes.
Carolynn_Bernier: Hi Carson.
Carolynn_Bernier: Can you hear me?
Carsten_Stöcker: Loud and…
Carsten_Stöcker: clear. Are you feel? Yes.
<Fireflies.ai_Notetaker_Miguel> Miguel Ángel invited Fireflies.ai here to record & take notes. By continuing, you agree to Privacy Policy | Fireflies.ai
Phil_Archer: Hi everyone.
Carolynn_Bernier: Rico, you're in the team. I can't hear you. You're muted.
Rigo_Wenning: Yeah. Yeah, but I'm in stealth mode, so Ian hasn't seen me here.
Phil_Archer: Don't tell anyone. I don't know.
Carolynn_Bernier: Phil, am I supposed to be leading this meeting?
Phil_Archer: It is between you and Casten to decide which of you two is doing that.
Carsten_Stöcker: Yeah, I think today we do a little bit of I think Caroline we'll source this out.
Carsten_Stöcker: I think today we probably give you an update what we discussed last time and you might want to discuss a bit your plans for the DPPs and also last time maybe it's the two of us who do this shortly.
Carolynn_Bernier: No, I think it might be useful that you just summarize…
Carolynn_Bernier: what was discussed last time.
Carsten_Stöcker: Yes. No, absolutely.
W3C Membership And IP Status
Carsten_Stöcker: I think last time of we again discussed the IP topic that we have to release the IP for the vocabulary even considering that there's not much IP in the vocabulary but we have to do formal process that's something that's being set up at the moment in addition so we discussed the importance of having other jurisdictions so that's not purely European kind of vocabulary that we also have kind of people in US kind of joining this and in APEC
Carsten_Stöcker: I basically reached out a little bit to APEC but that's something I think where we have to give more attention and we also reached out to the US for the business vocabulary and this week we have a meeting with the US Chamber of Commerce. Let's see if we can agree on kind of collaborating on the business vocabulary. that's a bit what we discussed last time. We also discussed I think update we received the invoice from W3C. I think mid or end of last week in the process of being paid maybe it's already being paid so that is also a formal member there was an invoice process pending but al was also being taken care from Emma from WCC and…
Carsten_Stöcker: then we are fully formal member and can join the Wednesday meetings and this was also discussed last week I don't think so
Carolynn_Bernier: because you can't join the Wednesday meetings…
Carolynn_Bernier: if you're not a formal member.
Ivan_Herman: In theory,…
Ivan_Herman: that's the case. Although we have a spy right now, but
Phil_Archer: And also there's always a dose of reality in these things.
Phil_Archer: I mean I think technically people who aren't members one way or another shouldn't be on this call, let alone the Wednesday call. So you end up just hurting yourself by throwing too much of that at so that's that issue.
Phil_Archer: I do want on that subject, Ronald, forgive me. Hello, we haven't met. And forgive me, I don't know who you are.
Carsten_Stöcker: one of my colleagues I guess.
Carsten_Stöcker: Yeah. Let me see.
Phil_Archer: Okay, fair enough. That's what I guessed, but I wanted to have a confession.
Carsten_Stöcker: Yeah. Yeah.
Phil_Archer: Thank you, and okay,…
Carsten_Stöcker: In my colleagues, but I think we will probably also do an intro. Yeah. Yeah.
Legal Clarity On Past Work
Phil_Archer: and the last thing before I shut up, and genuinely do shut up. Rio, yes, I keep mean to write to you. It's my fault I haven't done it. I really do need your help. I need to know what we need to do to get something in writing that says all the work that's been done in Surpass 2 and all the work's been done in Web Build that we're going to build on, we can do legally.
Rigo_Wenning: I can do that by this week. I can do that this week.
Phil_Archer: Great. Thank you.
Rigo_Wenning: It's not so dense. Last two weeks were really really really dense.
Rigo_Wenning: Apologies. but I have to Yeah,…
Phil_Archer: I'm just feeling okay.
Rigo_Wenning: but I will ask Caroline to see what the SPASS commitments are in the consortium agreement and then I think we can figure it out. that shouldn't be an issue.
Phil_Archer: Thank you.
Carsten_Stöcker: By the way,…
Carsten_Stöcker: I will so from our side, in terms of the invoice, we received the invoice last week and we paid it last week. So this is all we paid it today, I guess. Yeah. so this is taking care. So we only need to have a formal update checkbox that ice the money was received by WBC and then we are formal member. Yeah.
Carolynn_Bernier: On the topic of commitments, I know there are many other core ontologies that will likely inspire our work. Eva being an author of at least one of them.
Carsten_Stöcker: Yeah.
Carolynn_Bernier: And if we are talking about commitments, why would only surpass two vocabularies be in scope of this check?
Rigo_Wenning: No no no no that's one at a time yeah yeah yeah lo will be full there are 100 research projects and…
Carolynn_Bernier: No, but I mean there UNPP vocabularies with commitments as well.
Rigo_Wenning: everyone has done their own. We had this famous vocabulary workshop in Budapest where Joan from Seammen's challenge just said it's much easier to do your own vocabulary than to reuse any of that and that's probably what we will do. So we will get inspired by everybody else but then we will do our own and there will be lots of them all around. if we really want to copy because it makes our life easier then I will have to check and we'll have to ask them because one of the catastrophes is when you are near recommendation and somebody makes a copyright stink to you and then all disintegrates and we want to avoid
Phil_Archer: For some reason the CSS isn't working on my screen and the things I can't see. So this is me putting my hand up. chair hat off, GS1 hat on. I really hope that we're not going to be writing a new vocabulary. I really hope that this work will highlight what has already been done and what is already good written by men and women of great experience and expertise and knowledge and I hope that the W3C documents come out of this say use that do that and if you do have your own term this term is almost the same as that or it is identical to that or whatever we really don't want to I mean this is SKCD 927…
Carsten_Stöcker: Yes.
Phil_Archer: what there are 14 standards with this already we should have one to do them all. There are 15 standards that do the same thing. I hope there'll be very very little newly defined in this group. It's about identify what's already been done because what's been done is blooming good.
Rigo_Wenning: I'm not debating that, it's a danger because if you check all the things, it's more work to reuse than to actually do. And I that this is just the warning that this dynamics exists and…
Rigo_Wenning: we have to take care of it. but I agree XKCD 927 is my favorite. The standards are great.
Phil_Archer: Yeah, exactly. Yeah.
Ivan_Herman: Administrative interruption,…
Ivan_Herman: may I ask who Monica Noitzki is because it's not on my list of official members of the working.
Carsten_Stöcker: Yeah. …
Carsten_Stöcker: so Monas from Bunis and Saga Falak and Bunisak is also in the process of joining W3C. Yeah. And Bun Saga Falak German Company registry is a pond to US chamber of commerce from high level perspective.
Ivan_Herman: But if it takes long,…
Ivan_Herman: I don't know where in the process that is. If it takes long, then she can join as an invited expert temporarily to avoid having raised eyebrows.
<Monika_Nowicki> Hi everyone
Carsten_Stöcker: Yes. Yeah,…
Carsten_Stöcker: that's it. Yeah. And Bonar is very important player because they're pushing very hard terms of the WCC vocabulary in VBU in Europe.
Carsten_Stöcker: For that reason, they're also kind of in the process of being member. Yeah. Y.
Ivan_Herman: I am not questioning that question.
Rigo_Wenning: Yeah, if they have…
Ivan_Herman: I am just an administrator in this case.
Rigo_Wenning: if they have any question about this, they can contact me. I can help them. I know bundes…
<Monika_Nowicki> sitting in the train at the moment and the connection is not the best. happy to introduce myself properly next time I am joining this call
Carsten_Stöcker: Mhm. …
Rigo_Wenning: because I'm in the board of the German native fog.
Carsten_Stöcker: Excellent. There we go. Sounds good.
<Ivan_Herman> thank you Monika, that sounds fine
Carolynn_Bernier: …
Vocabulary Legal Status In EU
Carolynn_Bernier: on the topic, sorry, sorry, may I come back to Phil's comment about little creation of new vocabularies,…
Carolynn_Bernier: which is rather the fundamental issue that I'd like to address. and this is something that I've discussed with Rigo sometimes, and I keep coming back to this…
Carsten_Stöcker: Thank you.
Carolynn_Bernier: because it's never entirely clear. is the legal status of vocabularies for automatic compliance verification in the EU? Because in the the GDP is a mandatory compliance tool, right? and at one point demonstrating compliance to a standard may not include vocabularies. for the moment there are mandatory vocabularies, not web vocabularies, but they're still more or less vocabularies that JDC 24 is going to make more or…
Carsten_Stöcker: Alexa.
Carolynn_Bernier: less mandatory. Right? So there is a compliance issue in Europe meaning that some specific terms may be necessary for compliance in the EU GBP context. Right? And so what I imagine is that the W3C vocabularies are kind of generic vocabularies and that can be profiled according to legal context. Maybe I'm No, Rico doesn't agree, but it's still not clear to me.
Rigo_Wenning: No, this is not this is a non-issue.
Carolynn_Bernier: I'm not sure because if the definition for a term is very defined and very precise in one legal context and is different in another legal context. I'm not sure how to ensure that ADP issued according to a legal context is compliant with that legal context. Am I not clear?
Rigo_Wenning: It's clear to me, but maybe not to the others.
Phil_Archer: Yeah, that's my understanding too. If there is some regulation that says do that and that is not what we're doing, then there's a problem. so I think we have to as far as we are able be aware of what JCC 24 is doing. and take it into account in some way.
Phil_Archer: I mean, when we get to looking for implementations, it has to be able to show that we've done these things. so, Rio, yes. I don't think you can just dismiss it. really t. I think Yeah, that's right.
Carolynn_Bernier: Thank you,…
Carolynn_Bernier: Phil, for agreeing with me.
Rigo_Wenning: I'm not dismissing it.
Rigo_Wenning: I'm not dismissing it, but bear with me. I was part of the making of the regulation 1025 2012 that governs this because we are now confronted with an ESPR article 9 that creates a certain amount of requirements and if you fulfill the requirement then you have and this is really a EU regulation specialty I don't think it exists this way in
Rigo_Wenning: US or in Asia is that you have this presumption of conformity that means that even if you presumption it's not unconformant it's a presumption of conformity that means this reverses the burden of proof that means the authority now has to prove to you that you are nonconformant if you correspond to what and now to this what we just naturally assume
Rigo_Wenning: assume that this is JTC 24 and whatever JTC 24 cooks but so far first of all feedback from the MSP I got was that over 60% of the standards coming out of Ten and Sench are rejected by the commission for lack of quality are we surprised no which means that if we don't have a European norm or harmonized European norm that is accepted to serve as the measure or requirements document for this presumption of conformity. The commission has to issue so-called delegated acts.
Rigo_Wenning: This is a piece of legislation and on the level for the Germans at the level of the EU that the commission can issue in a procedure and this delegated act can reference for example W3C standards or recommendations.
Rigo_Wenning: to argue whether those are produced according to regulation 1025. the commission can freely argue but what the commission does is it passes by the recognition procedure that is given to the multistakeholder platform on standardization.
Rigo_Wenning: There will be an the comes assessment whether this was produced according to NX2 criteria transparency WC has passed this test I don't know how many times then there will be an entry in the journal official of the European Commission and that means that in a delegated act the commission can just say hey the vocabulary that was produced by the verifiable credentials working group. sh shall be used and…
Rigo_Wenning: you shall use this standard from JTC 24 to produce this presumption of conformity.
Carolynn_Bernier: But here you're assuming that the GDC 24 module 4,…
Carolynn_Bernier: the one on data interoperability will be rejected by commission.
Carolynn_Bernier: This is not certain.
Rigo_Wenning: Yeah, but…
Rigo_Wenning: but it means if JTC 24 and the way they write it currently in this V technical neutral blah blah blah way it's almost unusable at least what I can say is that in addition we would then claim that we fulfill all requirements from this interoperability specification of working of task force work group 4 when you use this vocabulary in a certain way that means we are filling out their gap
Carolynn_Bernier: So I know the people in commission who will be responsible for accepting or refusing the the Sense standards and I doubt that they will refuse them because of the political necessity that they accept them. So in my opinion these standards will be accepted as is. Right?
Carolynn_Bernier: So for me it seems pretty clear that we have to align to I doubt that there will be an opportunity for a multistakeholder platform to propose other things or I don't know what is exactly the procedure you proposed. Carson your hand is up. Yes.
Scope Of Vocabulary Development
Carsten_Stöcker: Yeah, I'm just wondering I think now we're discussing let's say very European internal processes that say to I think we should descope it from here because I think what's relevant for here that we come up with a vocabulary that we don't reinvent the wheel that there is stakeholder support by ecosystem such as the European surplus ecosystem the United Nations transparency ecosystem or whatever so we can reuse a bit have a base vocabulary because In the end, The value for me is that it's a base vocabulary. So when people in China have to do something with battery passports, with business models that they know what to do because they consume the W3C tooling and via this they get the full vocabulary and then they pretty much know what to do in IT systems from the vocabulary point of view and this is covers then out of the box a lot of compliance requirements.
Carsten_Stöcker: But I don't think we have to make sure that every compliance requirement by law is being covered by WCC. I think we should provide the tooling that eases the entire process and if it then has a high let's say a 99% coverage terms of the regulatory requirements terms vocabulary then it's fine but if it's not I think here we should really focus on the base vocabulary and make sure we have a proper tooling that we can reuse what Phil also mentioned what is there and from a business wallet vocabulary that's completely our strategy to reuse what has been kind of developed in terms of business vocabulary to do the outreach to us and to APE but I guess primarily to us that we have the base vocabulary and then we have it on the tooling that developers can just consume the tooling and this makes their life easier. I think that's a bit our strategy. Yeah, maybe we should kind of descope a bit this internal European detailed discussions from that perspective.
Rigo_Wenning: I would argue against that because what we cater if the ind how to make the industry happy the industry will be happy…
Rigo_Wenning: if we have easy presumption of conformity because then they don't have to do huge amounts of bureaucracy.
Carsten_Stöcker: Yes. And absolutely.
Carsten_Stöcker: But the question is, do we need to discuss it here with Phil with all the others?
Rigo_Wenning: Yes.
Carsten_Stöcker: Not much not sure. Rigo Wenning:
Rigo_Wenning: Why? Because what we normally W3C defines worldwide and then does a profile. Here we do it the other way around. We want to achieve presumption of conformity and we want to have JTC 24 specifications. If you look at them, they will allow you for conformity in 27,000 different ways using IEC data dictionaries from the 60s. semen get start, super duper. But for easy things, we will have to write a cookbook with our vocabulary around our vocabulary.
Rigo_Wenning: a cookbook on how and saying look if you use it this way this is our vocabulary that works globally here and here and then we profile our own stuff by saying and if you want to achieve presumption of conformity in Europe this is how you do it because there will be many of those profiles Puan was already confronted with the world customs organization.
Rigo_Wenning: They are begging us to get something going then they will adopt or profile or I assume this is the essence Ivan of what we try to achieve with the variety problem in link data is that you can have the core plus spread out profiles so that's why I think this is the place of doing our own core
Rigo_Wenning: inspired by all the good things, not reinventing the wheel, but also that we have a formal working group that can, function as this kind of center of liaison where we negotiate with the others about the profiles and how to achieve something that is recognized a standard that is recognized by the bureaucrats… which makes them conformity easy for industry and this is our business proposition as a standards organization.
Carolynn_Bernier: I couldn't agree more with Rigo.
Carolynn_Bernier: I would not be able to get on boarding by Surpass 2, by our community, by everyone if I cannot guarantee 100% presumption of conformity. This is what we're selling. is what we're offering.
Carsten_Stöcker: Okay, I think that it's a good objective. Then we kind of let's say note this down.
Rigo_Wenning: But Ken, it doesn't preclude what you say by saying that okay we should first concentrate on having our assets being in place and…
Rigo_Wenning: and then we shouldn't kind of politically hang on the line of JTC 24 because that doesn't make sense. We should
Carsten_Stöcker: I was only question…
Carsten_Stöcker: if we need to discuss this here with EAN with Phil because I think they're very down to the earth very specific things JTC 24 or we do it kind of in a smaller group and then present a conclusion to this meeting. Yeah, I was just kind of challenging a bit the process.
Carsten_Stöcker: So if you feel we should discuss this in this group,…
Carsten_Stöcker: happy to do this, but I'm just wondering this was not too nittygritty detail. this was my question. Yeah. Yeah.
Carolynn_Bernier: I think that it's important to understand…
Carolynn_Bernier: what is the scope of the work on DPP vocabularies that we want to address. And so I like what is the goal? What is the vision? Right? And I think there's no better place than this group to first agree on…
Carsten_Stöcker: Okay,… Carolynn Bernier:
Carolynn_Bernier: what is the goal and what is the vision. No. Yeah.
Carsten_Stöcker: good. If you pay to do this, that's fine. No. Yeah.
Rigo_Wenning: Sorry because it just is removing obstacles for our work. Now everybody gets a common understanding of what's our role, what's our function, what's our selling point. And as long as Ivan is not getting grumpy, I'm not concerned.
Carsten_Stöcker: Should we document this in a mini task force charter that we do two mini tasks that we do a mini whatever we do a mini we do a task force charter and…
Carsten_Stöcker: then we have two modules the goals and the visions and the process for the DPPS and the same for the business wallet and then we have in writing and can agree on this or…
Phil_Archer: That sounds similar to…
Phil_Archer: although not quite the same as a use case document.
Carsten_Stöcker: use case document job Yeah.
Rigo_Wenning: absolutely useful document is key to everything.
Rigo_Wenning: Phil, I couldn't agree more because I just come out of a DTOL on system theory. so one of the most sub subversive comments was can we have a concrete use case for your theory which he couldn't of course and…
Carolynn_Bernier: Yes.
Rigo_Wenning: that's where the rubber hits the road and that's why I'm fully for Right.
Carsten_Stöcker: So basically…
Carsten_Stöcker: then I think we do a use case document with goals and visions for DPPs and business wallets for the vocabulary. That's good. This is what we can then document in github and the sum of both use case documents is pretty much our task force charter.
Phil_Archer: …
Phil_Archer: good. I would suggest from what you've been discussing here and what I know is in the background to all this is that is done sooner rather than later that first version doesn't need to be complete. So the W3C process allows you to create a first public working draft of your document, which would need a full group resolution to publish by the way, but that's a minor detail. But getting that in public now sets out what you're going to do. It would also include your scope and therefore you'd be putting a marker down in public that would allow you to have these kind of conversations. how does this work relate to JD24 which is going to be a question people have to answer. What is this presumptive conformity and so on.
Phil_Archer: Those terms need to be in there.
Phil_Archer: And I think this group already has the knowledge to bash something out in a pretty short space of time. And even if it's not complete, get that out there.
Carolynn_Bernier: But can you explain to me…
Carolynn_Bernier: what a use case document is in the context of W3C?
Phil_Archer: Normally speaking, it's a set of Alice wants to send a message to Bob doing and doesn't want Charles to hear about it. Therefore, he does this. so there are loads of different examples of this, but essentially it sets out the individual problem space that you're trying to solve and from that then comes requirements. It must have these different features. There are lots of them around. most working groups produce them. I am simply going to point you to the one that I worked on most recently, which is a couple of years ago now. and I think if I remember where it is. Yay, I even got the URL so let me just share this with you. that's an example of a use case document. and that I worked on with Joe Andrew in the working group a while back.
Phil_Archer: And you can see there's there 12 different use cases there including eidas by the and then from that you then get okay dids need to be able to support this and this feature. Now I don't think a direct copy of that is what you need for this group. but it is nevertheless acceme services wants to put a product on the European single market. This is somebody wants to use a EU business wallet. This is how you do it. It's a business wallet that is not an EU business wallet that is a DPB that is not defined by the European Commission. this is how it may differ or whatever. So don't make all your use cases European. But those setting out the problem space and then the we need vocabularies that meet this requirement, we need these vocabularies.
Phil_Archer: You could even include a thing that says we are not going to cover XY Z. Those are out of scope. But you're laying out the problem you're trying to solve, how you're going to solve it, and what you're not going to do. And I think you could bash that out between you pretty soon and I think it would be good to do so because obviously people are aware of this group now. There are people going to be asking questions about what are you doing…
Carolynn_Bernier: I agree.
Phil_Archer: because Haven't they done it already? All those questions that you're basically discussing now come up with answers that you can document and I think that'll be a really useful thing to do.
Rigo_Wenning: Practical question who is capable of providing a bike shed template for us to fill out because I don't how to use it.
Ivan_Herman: bike shed. we use respect.
<Phil_Archer> Use Cases and Requirements for Decentralized Identifiers
Rigo_Wenning: You use what?
Ivan_Herman: The whole working group respect everyone. So it would be a bad thing to have part of a task force starting to use a different tool. And let me also showed us the last time that some of the documents that are in preparation are already done in respect and they are perfectly using everything that we use. So we already I have seen one document last week for that.
Ivan_Herman: So it's respect.
Rigo_Wenning: And we have Ingo who knows how to deal with respect.
Ivan_Herman: He certainly does.
Ivan_Herman: I certainly do. Phil certainly does.
Carolynn_Bernier: What's up?
Phil_Archer: and we're happy to teach those that don't.
Ivan_Herman: But again, Phil. Yeah.
Phil_Archer: And we're happy to teach those that haven't used it yet. And I know Ava is very keen to start writing No,…
Carolynn_Bernier: Does it look anything like latex?
Eva_Blomqvist: Of course.
Ivan_Herman: No, it's in HTML.
Carolynn_Bernier: Sorry if I cut you off.
Eva_Blomqvist: No. I just said yes.
Phil_Archer: and it was minuteed, right? Working group members said,…
Phil_Archer: "Yes, you got the job.
Eva_Blomqvist: I don't know these tools. but I'm eager
Phil_Archer: Of course, we'll help. Of course. Phil Archer:
Carolynn_Bernier: When can we launch this
Phil_Archer: You've already got your GitHub repo. I think you could do
Ivan_Herman: Last week we said that there would be one resourceful for the group the task force.
Ivan_Herman: I am waiting to have a name for it that you will agree in and then there is a bike shedding reaction for always on what the name of the repository should be. So I don't take sides you give me a name I create the repo with all the basic scaffolding in it.
Repository Naming Convention
Rigo_Wenning: then this is the most important question for today. What should the name of the repo be?
Ivan_Herman: Let's not do it here.
<Carsten_Stöcker> Here is the Business Wallet Vocab Example:
Rigo_Wenning: Follow everything.
Ivan_Herman: I mean one possibility is to be very dictatorial and…
Ivan_Herman: we say that Carson and Caroline decide among themselves what the name will be and will be there's no rule the only rule we have is that it begins with VC dash to separate it from the others and…
Carolynn_Bernier: No, no.
Carolynn_Bernier: I don't know how to choose a proper repo name because I'm sure there are proper rules for naming repos.
Ivan_Herman: we have VC render method we have VC CDI via BCD BPC I don't even know verifiable model so we have everything you have one term that encompasses…
Ivan_Herman: what we do that's all I need…
Carsten_Stöcker: And it can be an acronym,…
Ingo_Wolf: Perfect.
Carsten_Stöcker: So it could be baby business or something like this.
Ivan_Herman: if this is what we agree on this is what I will do this works let's not make too much of a big business about
Carsten_Stöcker: Yeah. Yeah.
Rigo_Wenning: DPP BW would be really cool…
Carolynn_Bernier: Yeah, DPPW is good.
Rigo_Wenning: because it describes all of it and it's very short.
<Phil_Archer> The Task Force mailing list is vc-dbw
Carsten_Stöcker: Yeah. Nobody Mhm.
Ivan_Herman: So you send me an email with so that the spelling should be as you mean and…
Ivan_Herman: not sorted by the sound.
Rigo_Wenning: Sorry. And…
Ivan_Herman: Okay. DPPD.
Rigo_Wenning: then This is me.
<Phil_Archer> vc-dpp-bw
Ivan_Herman: And so Regal, what we agreed upon, I just want to repeat that this is one repository for at least two of our documents.
Ivan_Herman: So maybe three if we do a UCR as well. So there would be on the top two different branches, one for DPP and one for the other one.
<Carsten_Stöcker> +1
Ivan_Herman: There They usually …
Carsten_Stöcker: And now the question is we have our respect vocabulary and…
<Rigo_Wenning> +1
Carsten_Stöcker: I think the other question was I think what Rio wanted to know I think not the respect vocabulary but when we have let's say the scope and the objectives do we put this in the respect or is this a second document yeah I think this was also about Rio's question.
Ivan_Herman: what most groups do they publish a note with the requirement separately. It can be one document for all the work not in the final spec…
Carsten_Stöcker: Okay. Absolutely.
Ivan_Herman: because that's too much but
Rigo_Wenning: What the f***?
Carsten_Stöcker: Do you have an example for such a node not note with the requirements…
Carsten_Stöcker: because I think that that's what we then should do first.
Carolynn_Bernier: We can clone Phils.
Ivan_Herman: You can that's exactly…
Carolynn_Bernier: No. We still have
Ivan_Herman: what I wanted to say you have the clone of fields I can also provide an example from the annotation space which is relatively small so there were ample examples all
Carsten_Stöcker: Yes. Yeah.
Rigo_Wenning: Those should be just documents that live in this VC DPP BW space.
Carsten_Stöcker: We only need a best practice example. I think that's fine. Yeah. Yes.
Rigo_Wenning: Phil wants it with dashes.
Phil_Archer: How am I look.
Rigo_Wenning: I would have done it without dashes, but if we have no. I agree that with dashes is better. so those should just be respect documents that live in that GitHub
Carsten_Stöcker: But this is good. I know the VC use case document by the way. then we have the two use case documents for business walls and DPP with scope objectives.
Carsten_Stöcker: I think…
Ingo_Wolf: Right. Hello.
Carsten_Stöcker: then should be pretty straightforward now.
<Phil_Archer> Verifiable Credentials Use Cases is the VC use cases doc
Phil_Archer: And just for background, both of the ones I pointed to you, they're both largely written by Joe Andrew, whose entire career has been made out of writing use cases.
Ivan_Herman: Yeah, but let's not go there.
Phil_Archer: Companies called legendary environments. that's what he does.
Ivan_Herman: But he still hasn't finished it as a result. He's still working it.
Carsten_Stöcker: And we do two of the use case documents or…
Carsten_Stöcker: just one? what do you prefer? Okay. Okay.
Phil_Archer: I personally think it's one document for use cases and…
Phil_Archer: requirements that you're working on for both DPP and BW. If you find that that's too cumbersome, all right, split them. But start with one and see how you go.
Rigo_Wenning: Having one has also the advantage to show in…
Carsten_Stöcker: That we do want
Rigo_Wenning: what we do how the business wallet relates to the DPP and vice versa…
<Ivan_Herman> Another example is EPUB Annotations Use Cases and Requirements
Phil_Archer: Yeah. I think there's one question as well that I hope that document will answer is What have those vocabulary got to do with VCs? Rigo Wenning:
Rigo_Wenning: which I think is an additional asset compared to the others who are looking at in isolation.
Carsten_Stöcker: No. Mhm. Yes. Yes.
Phil_Archer: I know there's an answer, but I think that's one of many questions that document could potentially, …
Carolynn_Bernier: I totally agree.
Phil_Archer: address. Yeah. Yeah.
Ingo_Wolf: Sorry.
Carolynn_Bernier: This is a fundamental question I ask myself every day actually.
Carsten_Stöcker: What is the question?
Rigo_Wenning: Yeah. But
Carsten_Stöcker: What is the question coming in?
Carolynn_Bernier: What do these vocabularies have to do with verifiable credentials? Because we can use the vocabularies without them.
Ivan_Herman: That's by itself not a problem,…
Carsten_Stöcker: No.
Ivan_Herman: Caroline. But the point is that at least in my understanding, what happens is that you will issue verifiable credentials on data that use this vocabulary. So technically speaking the verify your credential which is a piece of JSON LD we use the terminology which is defined by one or the other or both. So it has to be prepared for that which means it has to have a JSON LD thing and…
Ivan_Herman: blah So it has to be explicitly bound to being used by a verifier credential.
Carsten_Stöcker: Yeah. Heat.
Ivan_Herman: But I think that was the whole idea behind
Carolynn_Bernier: You go.
Rigo_Wenning: yeah I think the industry is concerned about fraud.
Rigo_Wenning: the authorities are concerned about being fooled and all of this means that we some we have talked at length about presumption of conformity this is really very very of value which means that people will fake whatever and if you can't secure that I think that this entire system is not worth a dime at least from a legal perspective and…
Carolynn_Bernier: What's the
Rigo_Wenning: that's why for me not only we need to make it like Ivan said align with the requirements of verifiable credentials but also select what goes into the verifiable credential and what doesn't because it's more burdensome to crypt and blah blah blah.
Carolynn_Bernier: I had a wonderful conversation with a colleague of Phil's Stefan Olsen from GS1 Sweden, completely adverse to the idea that DPSPs should be issued as verifiable credentials. It's a wonderful conversation we're having at the moment and I really respect Stefan's opinion. So I will listen to what he has to say and I think a DPP for socks definitely doesn't need to be issued as a verifiable credential.
Phil_Archer: I wish I'd known that last week when I was in the same room as him. I would have had a chat with him. and obviously do I need to do that?
Carolynn_Bernier: You can join us tomorrow morning at 11.
Phil_Archer: Let me have a look.
Carolynn_Bernier: What?
Phil_Archer: …
Rigo_Wenning: At least
Phil_Archer: possibly. yeah. But I think it's what I'll let you have that discussion. and Stafan was in my session on VCs last week at the GS1 event. so I see and see how he ends up. I mean and I think it's certainly the case that not all DPS will be a VC, but don't tell Steve Capella said that.
Rigo_Wenning: Imagine you combine 10 DPPS into a complex machinery and the complex machinery fails and then somebody says that this is because you provided wrong information to one of the suppliers. Look, this is for socks. I agree and there is that the discussion with Stfan will be fruitful because he is combating bureaucracy and that's fine but we need to see where we still need
Phil_Archer: I'm also seeing you next week.
Phil_Archer: Just remember I'm seeing you in Oslo next week.
Ingo_Wolf: It's okay.
Phil_Archer: So, I will have a chat with him about it.
Carolynn_Bernier: Great. So,…
Verifiable Credentials Use Cases
Carolynn_Bernier: Safan says VCs are great when you need portable data, But if the data remains located with the responsible economic operator that has the responsibility to issue it,…
Carolynn_Bernier: you don't need data portability.
Phil_Archer: Yeah,…
Rigo_Wenning: Databases are great. Please use mine.
Phil_Archer: once it's out in the wild, once you've already done that, then it can get copied so it's a bit of a slippery slope that one Right.
Carolynn_Bernier: If that's the case, then I would like it written in black and white.
Carolynn_Bernier: Why you think VCs are necessary? Because this is kind of fundamental to our group. why are we here sitting in a VC working group, right?
Phil_Archer: I think Steve Capell answers it in his UNP work. It's about scalability. It's about not having to go back to call an API every time to verify that something is true. and you can verify, if you got 10,000 GS1s, 10,000 VCs from one place, and you got the public key for it, you can verify all 10,000 in, one second. you don't have to keep calling back to an API. It's a scalability, the ability to link them together. and in the case of a product that's moving through a supply chain, it can be passed on one to another to another without having to go back. We even have a paper that talks about how you can do and obiscate the company because in a supply chain people are happy to know…
Phil_Archer: where they got it from and where they're going to send it to, but they don't want you to know all the way back to where it originally came from. All sorts of commercial sensitivity around that. being able to pass on data with the security potentially in some of that there are lots of things that it can do and…
Carolynn_Bernier: Mhm. clear.
Phil_Archer: I'm waffling because I know I'm conscious of time and you're meeting. but yes and maybe the use case document does need to have a session on when it is appropriate to use a verifiable credential to encode this information. I think for the business wallet the sparit folks will tell me I think it's much more directly needed. Yeah. No.
Carolynn_Bernier: Yes, there's no because the issuer is not the holder. But in the DPP case, the issuer is the holder.
Carolynn_Bernier: In most cases,…
Phil_Archer: If you're claiming that something is 100% or organic cotton made in Turkey, that's at least two credentials held by the manufacturer,…
Carolynn_Bernier: no, I'm talking about the DPP as the commission sees it the data describing the sock, right? So,…
Phil_Archer: right? …
Carolynn_Bernier: It's not containing any links to anything. it's not suffic sophisticated. it's the responsible economic opera,…
Phil_Archer: I see. Right. Okay.
Carolynn_Bernier: the Rio is hosting it on their own platform. So they're issuer of the thing and they're the holder of the thing, right? No,…
Phil_Archer: If a European Commission, I wouldn't trust that. I want to know where they got it from because I tell you if big brand tells me that their product is rainforest friendly I don't believe right sorry
Carolynn_Bernier: no, no.
Carolynn_Bernier: You're confusing the DBP and the claims that it links to Ro.
<Rigo_Wenning> customs papers will not go to some API
Carsten_Stöcker: Thank you.
Rigo_Wenning: Again,…
Rigo_Wenning: the DPP is an artificial creation by bureaucracy bureaucrats.
Carolynn_Bernier: We agree. Yes.
Rigo_Wenning: And the thing is that it will be used in all kinds of contexts. some of which and I agree with the Stafan because I deeply respect him say hello is that in some context we don't want this bureaucracy but it's very important that we also tell people hey in this case we don't want the bureaucracy but you can still use our vocabulary hint hint and in other contexts especially when it comes to market authorities
Rigo_Wenning: And when it comes to combining different DPPS into one complex product where your little electronics chip that you got from China is from a company that may not be under your jurisdiction to force them to keep their API up even…
Rigo_Wenning: if they go out of business. So you want to have a certain amount of data that is traveling and that is stored somewhere else and that is verifiable because if it's not verifiable you can just make up whatever you want.
Ivan_Herman: Let's make it a little bit less sophisticated.
Ivan_Herman: Whatever we define, we do not say that you have to use it within a VC. The only thing we say it can be used within a VC. The rest is non not of our interest here. and the way the vocabulary is defined is that it abides to the requirement to be used within a VC. That's all we say.
Ivan_Herman: And if the vocabulary is used for somewhere else which ignores VC or we don't care.
Rigo_Wenning: Ivan, the only thing I want to make sure is that it can be used with VCs.
Ivan_Herman: That's what I said.
Phil_Archer: Right. Respect.
Rigo_Wenning: And so I want to confirm that.
Carolynn_Bernier: …
Carolynn_Bernier: can someone give us a little tutorial on…
Carolynn_Bernier: what is that tool you're talking about? the recheck respec And…
Phil_Archer: Yes. you can I'm just trying to find the actual website…
Ivan_Herman: You want
Ivan_Herman: or you do that respect essentially you write HTML that's the most important part of it…
Phil_Archer: where no. That's something completely different. Sorry. Thank you.
Carolynn_Bernier: if you're not familiar with HTML,…
Rigo_Wenning: It's easier that No,…
Ivan_Herman: then you are out of luck that's true no it's not latte let's not go into the comparison of latte and…
Carolynn_Bernier: does it look like latex? This is
Rigo_Wenning: it's not like but it's easier.
Ivan_Herman: and This is if you want comparison, I can say SGML, but certainly not latex.
<Phil_Archer> ReSpec Documentation
Ivan_Herman: So you essentially write in HTML except that you have to put at the beginning of the file there's a structure that you have to fill in with some parameters and then the whole thing runs through a very complicated tool that will format the whole thing so that it looks like a W3C documents. It checks a bunch of requirements. it will shout at you if it's not okay etc. So it takes care of many of the repetitive and…
Carolynn_Bernier: Okay.
Ivan_Herman: boring things that has to be done in formatting…
Ivan_Herman: but yes unfortunately it has to be written in HTML.
Rigo_Wenning: which is easy.
Phil_Archer: However, I Yes.
Rigo_Wenning: I can Caroline I can help you. It's easier than logic.
Ivan_Herman: I don't even want to go into a religious debate about latte versus HTML.
Rigo_Wenning: Ivan, I'm not talking about
Ivan_Herman: I use people I extensively use both in my life.
Carolynn_Bernier: Right. Sure.
Ivan_Herman: So, I have edited books completely with latte. So, let's not go there. Whichever
Phil_Archer: Honestly, it's first of all, there's loads of help. from everyone and the way you learn editing HTML is to edit someone else's and it becomes really easy. the other thing people might come in there are details that someone like me can probably help you with but honestly the basic task I promise you is so far within your capability you won't even question
Carolynn_Bernier: Yeah. because my brain works when I write. So, I'm very happy to start, outlining what this use case document, the sections that it should contain and throwing ideas so that we can rewrite each other's work and things like that. So, I No,… Carolynn Bernier:
<Phil_Archer> <h2>Here a heading</h2><p>Here is a pareagraph</p>
Ivan_Herman: Caroline, I mean,…
Ivan_Herman: if it makes you less problematic, can do you know markdown? That's even simpler.
Rigo_Wenning: Ivan. No,…
Carolynn_Bernier: I'm not worried. It'll be fine.
Ivan_Herman: Okay.
Carolynn_Bernier: Don't worry.
<Ingo_Wolf> ReSpec Documentation
Phil_Archer: Start it in Google Docs.
Carolynn_Bernier: It'll be fine.
Ivan_Herman: Good. Okay.
Phil_Archer: Carolyn, start it Just type it in Google Docs.
Rigo_Wenning: no, no, no, no. don't. I'm working with Kabolin since sometime now. Just give her the respect structure. explain her what P stands for and the rest is done.
Carolynn_Bernier: I'm not a Okay.
Eva_Blomqvist: P is already in the comments in the chat.
Phil_Archer: Yeah, it is. Anyway,
Carolynn_Bernier: So, it looks a lot latex heading to Yeah, I see. I so when can we start? Next week I am available. So we can start at I suggest next week's meeting we start if we have access to a GitHub and a version that is empty or…
Carsten_Stöcker: Excellent.
Carolynn_Bernier: least we've cloned from someplace else.
Ivan_Herman: Yeah, I will create the repo and…
Carolynn_Bernier: We can start, kind of drafting the sections that we think we need in this use case document.
Ivan_Herman: put some example initial documents there by tomorrow afternoon at the latest.
Carsten_Stöcker: So on our business wallet side, we will define what kind of use case examples should go there and then we have the business wallets, the DPP section and I think after this and later so we can describe the intersections of business wallets and DPPS but I guess we can kind of let's say thegregation of duties you guys focus on the DPSPs we do something on the business wallets and then we have at least an outline of the use cases by next week. Yeah. So maybe not.
Carolynn_Bernier: By next week.
Carolynn_Bernier: No, we can at least in the meeting maybe do the work during the meeting because before the meeting I doubt that I will not have time.
Carsten_Stöcker: No kidding.
Phil_Archer: And…
Phil_Archer: there's some process here in terms of how this get in. So once you got a skeleton which can be very very basic then contributions are made through pull requests. people write little bits and put them in that that will need reviewing by each other basically but I think you do need to decide potentially in the next seven minutes who the editor or editors will be which are not the same as everyone's going to contribute to those are the authors…
Phil_Archer: but who are going to be the actual editors who actually know it inside out and pull it
Carsten_Stöcker: We have more hands.
Carsten_Stöcker: Maybe Rio and Runa is your hand first and then Rio.
Ronald_Koenig: Yes, I have a question how we deal with vu because we already have started working on the vocabulary of course and it is already maintained in a repository and is in the responsibility of the semantic group of the vu project. Is it necessary to move this repository into a W3 repository or…
Ronald_Koenig: can we stay where we currently are?
Ivan_Herman: No, we have to move it.
Ronald_Koenig: Okay, that's maybe something what we really have to discuss because currently this part of the vu project and all the guys which are participating in this one are sponsored or…
Ingo_Wolf: Check.
Ronald_Koenig: beneficiary of the V project moving it over to the W3C3 maybe is not such an easy case.
Ivan_Herman: So that's moving over a repository is also possible. That's
Ronald_Koenig: Just make sure that it's no problem with the physical task to move it. I can move a repository from one side to another or foret or whatever. No problem at all. But what I'm asking is the let me say vuild is assuming that this is something which is work currently ongoing inside the vu project and we have to make sure that moving it out somewhere completely different is of course something where the consultant will say okay why we are doing it because we are paying for it currently or the different contributors to the European business wallet and
Carolynn_Bernier: That's
Ronald_Koenig: This is one question and the other one what is interesting for me is in rebuild there are I think 16 use cases which are defined by other working groups. So that means for example KYC KYS supply chain data spaces opening corporate bank account X ID and…
Carsten_Stöcker: Excellent. this I think reusing is a good idea.
Ronald_Koenig: all the other stuff is well defined and…
Ingo_Wolf: Oops. Hey. Ronald Koenig:
Ronald_Koenig: they are describing the use cases. but if we provide now another use case document we will duplicate the work and sometime we have to synchronize the work with your already existing use cases. So how we want to deal with it? Is there idea how we can do this? Rigo Wenning:
Carsten_Stöcker: The question is what's the level of detail? I would assume in the WC use case document is less level of detail. but let's have a look into this.
Ronald_Koenig: Yeah, I don't think we have to find a solution for this one because for example for KYC we are discussing AML with the different bank institutions in Germany and in Europe what are the requirements from the legal perspective which is the AML regulation…
Carolynn_Bernier: Okay.
Ronald_Koenig: what we have to do how identity proving is done and all this is described in the use cases and if we repeat this one then we also have to synchronize it with all the stakeholders we have in the vbuild the financial institutes and so on. Okay.
Carsten_Stöcker: Let's move to Hence fill and…
Phil_Archer: Yeah,…
Carsten_Stöcker: then reg
Phil_Archer: just briefly, thank you, Ronald. I made the mistake. I thought we build vocabulary work was done. I didn't realize it was still active. That makes a difference. It means that we need to copy it into what we're doing and be aware of it. and you'll have to be the interface to make sure we keep up or…
Phil_Archer: whatever, but that doesn't make it more complicated. I didn't realize it was still active. And yes, to go back to where we started from, we have got to get the IP sorted out.
Carsten_Stöcker: There you go.
Phil_Archer: Absolutely. Else we ain't doing nothing.
Rigo_Wenning: that's what I also wanted to talk about.
Rigo_Wenning: So this is precisely what Phil was looking at that that means we built consortium has a consortium agreement and general and in this general assembly we do standardization and there must be some kind of decision making. We really mean it with standardization. we kind kind of select those and those parts of what they are producing on the foreground to move it to standardization and I think that does the trick. That's exactly what the Cas 2 vocabulary but also the rebuild vocabularies we are looking for. We have to scope that means we need to individualize what parts of what they were producing. We want to be part of the standardization effort. We have to single it out.
Rigo_Wenning: We have to move it and then from there and of course we will create liaison to those groups by saying that we have a discussion with s pass 2 or make sure because you are participating in the standardization effort that you bring in the aspects of the we build consortium those can be positive or negative and so on but I have another issue that is to Carolyn Phil but also to Ken is when we write the use case document I have not on my radar the current legal acts that are in the US and in Asia.
Rigo_Wenning: So if you for this use case document I would have please send me or if those legal documents pointers to them so I can analyze them for the requirements document…
Rigo_Wenning: because I think that's important that at the basis of it the legal act is not Steve Capel's Recommendation 49.
Carolynn_Bernier: So, what?
Carolynn_Bernier: I'm sorry. I didn't hear I don't have for DPP or…
Ingo_Wolf: Come on.
Rigo_Wenning: It's the proposed statute in the US. It's perhaps a posed statute in China or proposed statute in Japan. both of them.
Carolynn_Bernier: or wallets.
Carolynn_Bernier: For DPP wallets in the US I think there's lots of work on that. Karsten knows this by heart. On DPP we have a hard time getting our hands on the Chinese standards. they're not public yet. there I have not heard of any regulation by China but what they do is they publish things that are called guidance documents or…
Ingo_Wolf: Right. Okay.
Carolynn_Bernier: something like that.
Carolynn_Bernier: They have a really…
Rigo_Wenning: Yeah, but…
Rigo_Wenning: if we have a hint to a guidance document,…
Carolynn_Bernier: but to the best of my colleague and…
Rigo_Wenning: We can ask our Chinese colleagues
Carolynn_Bernier: my knowledge there is no legal regulatory activity in China on DPP nor any well in there are other states that are looking into it Turkey, Vietnam, Korea but I don't have the texts. These are discussions that are going on.
Carsten_Stöcker: I think it doesn't matter because it's not yet ready. But we have a base vocabulary for Europe, US and Chinese implementers that are exporting European Union needs to do this. For that reason, I think it's totally fine even if the legal regulatory landscape is evolving.
Carsten_Stöcker: Yeah. Then we update…
Carolynn_Bernier: But I don't even have the Chinese standards. I hope they will be published soon. Yeah.
Carsten_Stöcker: what we do even. Yeah.
Ivan_Herman: Okay, last thing and…
Ivan_Herman: then I think Phil and I have to go because we are waiting for another meeting.
<Eva_Blomqvist> I need to go now, but look forward to the repo, and see you latest next week!
Phil_Archer: So, do we use me? Okay.
Ivan_Herman: We have a chair's meeting hil. so the back to what you said Ronald about the use cases the use case document that we publish is not a very formal document it's not a recommendation it doesn't have all kinds of requirements in a sense it's really a working document it's even published as what we call a working note that means that if we write the UCR which refers back
Ivan_Herman: to the other one explicitly by use case XY Z in that document. It's perfectly fine. we can refer back to other documents from there. There is no because in a recommendation we can normatively refer only to standards.
Ivan_Herman: So there is a requirement there but in a UCR there is nothing like that. So we can happily go on. Okay. Absolutely.
Carsten_Stöcker: And the level of detail is much higher,…
Carsten_Stöcker: Use case document can be much higher level of detail because a little bit educational what can you do with it and I think that should be fine.
Ivan_Herman: We choose the level of requirement and granularity that we want. It's for ourselves in a way.
Carsten_Stöcker: You need to go next steps we think about the use cases DPPs business wallets that we have at least something to discuss next week and…
Ivan_Herman: The document helps us when it comes to technical solution and technical features.
Ivan_Herman: Then we can rely on the use case document to say we need that feature because there's a use case for it use case requires this and then we don't do that.
Carolynn_Bernier: I just sent to you our consortium agreement. Rego
Carsten_Stöcker: in addition I think Rio looks in the IP and these are the two kind of key up actions from this meeting. I guess anything go
Rigo_Wenning: Yeah, expect some Female.
Ivan_Herman: Yeah. Okay, bye-bye.
Ingo_Wolf: Thank you.
Phil_Archer: Okay, byebye.
Phil_Archer: Thank you. Meeting ended after 01:07:38 👋 This editable transcript was computer generated and might contain errors. People can also change the text after it was created.