Meeting minutes
Ingo_Wolf: Hello. Pass on.
Dr._Susanne_Guth-Orlowski: How do you go?
<Fireflies.ai_Notetaker_Miguel> Miguel Ángel invited Fireflies.ai here to record & take notes. By continuing, you agree to Privacy Policy | Fireflies.ai
Dr._Susanne_Guth-Orlowski: Thank you.
Ingo_Wolf: Dia of Bes. I will adma.
Dr._Susanne_Guth-Orlowski: Yeah, it's 30. published. Mhm. Hi Eva.
Ingo_Wolf: Head camera.
Dr._Susanne_Guth-Orlowski: Good to see you again. Hi Ted. I think we haven't met before.
Eva_Blomqvist: Hi, I'm in the car so I will be a bit silent maybe.
Ted_Guild: Thank you.
Dr._Susanne_Guth-Orlowski: It's okay. I even
Ivan_Herman: Hi, good afternoon.
Dr._Susanne_Guth-Orlowski: Ingo and…
Dr._Susanne_Guth-Orlowski: Hornald, I was wondering who is leading this call now. I'm sorry I wasn't able to participate until today, I guess.
Ronald_Koenig: Hello. Go ahead.
Dr._Susanne_Guth-Orlowski: Just checking where we stand.
Ingo_Wolf: …
Ingo_Wolf: yeah. Please go ahead. yeah, the group leaders are Carolyn and Carson. so actually I expect one of them to come today. but yeah else we did not assign any other group leaders. So Ken and Carolyn are the ones for the meeting today.
Ingo_Wolf: I can share…
Ivan_Herman: Before we get there and…
Ingo_Wolf: what I did in the last week and present the current state of the use cases and requirements so to say. yeah that's how I would see it.
Ivan_Herman: while we are at the ME meeting issues next week, do we hold the meeting on Monday or we don't?
Rigo_Wenning: I will not be there…
Rigo_Wenning: because that's a public
Ivan_Herman: Yeah, it's a public holiday for me as well.
Ivan_Herman: Not that I care too much, but that's why I'm asking. I guess it's a public holiday in many European countries.
Dr._Susanne_Guth-Orlowski: Yes, true.
Dr._Susanne_Guth-Orlowski: Hi, Ro. It's been a while.
Battery Vocabulary Discussion
Rigo_Wenning: But once you are here last week we were looking for the battery vocabulary.
Dr._Susanne_Guth-Orlowski: Mhm. Yeah.
Rigo_Wenning: Do you know something about it and where we can get it and whether this could be one part of our concrete examples
Dr._Susanne_Guth-Orlowski: So, it's interesting that everybody is of course jumping on the battery vocabulary.
Dr._Susanne_Guth-Orlowski: So I guess the one that's closest to an aligned vocab vocabulary is the one that's currently had been published by the battery pass ready project.
Rigo_Wenning: Mhm.
Ingo_Wolf: Oops.
Dr._Susanne_Guth-Orlowski: the version three of the vocabulary that this dika is spec 9900 but this is kind of outdated a little bit or at least some of the stakeholders weren't or have further developed the vocabulary so I believe that the most aligned one is now the version 1.3
Dr._Susanne_Guth-Orlowski: published by the battery pass ready project and I think that is involved so maybe Ingo and…
Dr._Susanne_Guth-Orlowski: Run can agree or disagree to what I'm saying. Mhm.
Ingo_Wolf: Concerning the data attribute long list…
Ingo_Wolf: which is in this version one and three that you mentioned yeah this is published however there was a GitHub repository for the versions before one or two and so on from battery as ready I guess. which also include ontologies and total files and not only schema definitions like JSON schema.
Ingo_Wolf: This is not released for the latest version I suppose. Yeah.
Dr._Susanne_Guth-Orlowski: Mhm. Yeah,…
Dr._Susanne_Guth-Orlowski: that's possible.
Rigo_Wenning: So could there be because why Susan is the battery area so interesting because it's the first to hit the application deadline.
Dr._Susanne_Guth-Orlowski: That's clear but we have to be careful that we are not standardizing it in three different places.
Dr._Susanne_Guth-Orlowski: So yeah, Rigo Wenning:
Rigo_Wenning: Yeah. so the thing is normally I totally rely on Kaholin for that is that Kolin knows everybody everywhere. meaning that we need to be sure that they are doing the right thing and sometimes you have those vocabularies developed somewhere where they have some JSON schema and this is not really link data friendly. so that you have to make transforms and all of that to make it usable which then defeats the exercise.
Rigo_Wenning: So there are a hundred ways of dealing with it. You go there and you say, "Hey, why don't you change this little bit and we are happy." Then they normally do it. At least that was the case for Fireware. sometimes they say, "Hey, W3C is interested in Super duper don't you want to take our stuff and integrate it into we say fine." here is the things we need. So this kind of standards are great, please use mine. It's really how to advance and the industry is looking for something reliable.
Rigo_Wenning: And if you have just a project that publishes something on a website, it's not good enough for industry because they will have sub substantial investment. And so at some point in time either this goes eas integrate some of it because then they rely on it. We get it recognized by the multistakeholder platform. and the article 13 and 14 of regulation 1025.
Rigo_Wenning: There are many ways but my goal here was to say hey how can we integrate that stuff with the vocabulary stuff so that we have a coherent link data scenery that we don't have too much of friction inside because the more friction we have the more we have transformation the more we need energy the more defeats the goal of the entire thing. but on the other hand we have the counter challenge is the Everybody uses the same thing for the same and total unification and this never happens because the world is far too diverse.
Rigo_Wenning: And so I'm changing a sweet spot between and one of the things I wanted to see is whether we can use one of those battery vocabularies to extract the common ground between fashion and…
Rigo_Wenning: and battery and others and then examp and make an example in the spec for an annex or something like that.
Dr._Susanne_Guth-Orlowski: Yeah. …
Dr._Susanne_Guth-Orlowski: let me maybe recap a little bit. I don't know if someone else has done that already but we've been working on the United Nations transparency protocol for maybe two years now where we have developed a logical model which has gone undergone several iterations of defining a generalized truck structure for a dig product passport logical model or data model which should be an input
Dr._Susanne_Guth-Orlowski: put of this work which also was one of the things that Caroline Ben suggested as input for this work. So I think Yeah.
Rigo_Wenning: Are we talking about the work from Steve Capel?
Dr._Susanne_Guth-Orlowski: Yeah. Exactly. Rigo Wenning:
Rigo_Wenning: Okay, that's aligned anyway. Yes.
Dr._Susanne_Guth-Orlowski: It's not Steve Capel's work alone, but yeah, it's led by him of course, but I think I contributed most of the digital product passport groundwork there. so we can point to that at least stay aligned with that.
Rigo_Wenning: So this is really a challenge. frozen. There's cavian.
Carolynn_Bernier: Sorry, I was late.
Dr._Susanne_Guth-Orlowski: My connection is gone.
Rigo_Wenning: No, you're back.
Dr._Susanne_Guth-Orlowski: Okay.
Rigo_Wenning: Are you inland?
Dr._Susanne_Guth-Orlowski: H I'm in I don't know what's happening.
Rigo_Wenning: Are you in funk land?
Dr._Susanne_Guth-Orlowski: I've been back to my computer today and it seems the connection is not great. Yeah. and then also we use certain technologies in UNP to create a logical model but we do not have any ontologies there. We maybe do not use some W3C mechanisms that would be nice to define some of the work. so for me…
Rigo_Wenning: Not only we need to show people I just learned today that the special data on the web working
Dr._Susanne_Guth-Orlowski: what I also would like to understand or would like to have a discussion about is which mechanisms and tools are we using to define maybe some digital product passport vocabulary for example. Yeah.
Dr._Susanne_Guth-Orlowski: So that we just have the basics but how do we define it? Every product passports needs an identifier. Every product passport has an economic operator that is responsible. So what I believe would help most people would be we take these three attributes and create a vocabulary with the tools that you want to use. and then see if we need five attributes or 10 for a product segment agnostic thing. Yeah. Uh-huh.
Rigo_Wenning: group is They are creating a huge ontology for any kind of measures you can imagine.
Dr._Susanne_Guth-Orlowski: Yeah, that's fine, too. yeah.
Rigo_Wenning: And so that would mean that we show people how to integrate those measures, by saying here is your economic operator and so on. This is the factory and then you can have quality measures and sensor measures all kind of measures and meters integrated into the DPP that you take just from the special data on the web so-called SOSA and SSN vocabularies and then for electronics you could use SAR for that and…
Dr._Susanne_Guth-Orlowski: Yeah. Yeah. Yes.
Rigo_Wenning: and we just need to show people how to do it in this specification and then we can say hey this is the unification trap we are not defining everything here we just give you a frame where you can fill and this is how you secure it and then this is how you secure it with a verifiable credential I think that way we can really kind of make good progress and…
Rigo_Wenning: ease the pain for many many
Dr._Susanne_Guth-Orlowski: So I see that Ken and…
Dr._Susanne_Guth-Orlowski: Kolin are here. So I was just asking questions.
Dr._Susanne_Guth-Orlowski: So I'm handing back over to the work group leaders and the plan they maybe have for the call today.
Rigo_Wenning: Yeah, we were just gossiping.
Carsten_Stöcker: Yeah, I think we started kind of with the use case requirements.
Use Case Requirements and Business Wallet
Carsten_Stöcker: So we started doing this from a business wallet perspective and I think this was discussed last week and from my perspective now we have two topics on the agenda in terms of how to kind of add more DPP related use cases and the second one is also I think kind of to finish this discussion about the next steps and then let's say discuss a bit what you just started how to kind of the base vocabulary for both for the DPPs and the business wallet because also on the business wallet side there are interested people in US in APEC especially in Japan who wants to contribute to the business wallet vocabulary but I think we have to agree on the kind of the base vocabulary and that's probably kind of for today in terms of next steps I
Ivan_Herman: So I think what we also discussed last week with the use case document is to separate the use case part…
Carsten_Stöcker: Mhm.
Ivan_Herman: which is on VCs in general from the part which is really relevant for the vocabulary itself and the VC use cases eventually should be added to the C use cases document which does exist and this task force should not do that but just the VC thinks…
Ivan_Herman: which are relevant for these vocabularies and concentrate on the vocabulary issues otherwise it doesn't look like a task force being part of a larger working group about
Carsten_Stöcker: Yeah, I think that's a big undertaking because we basically let's say kind of describe business wallet use cases in general to have them in one place. Yeah. where should we move if we move them over? So where should we move them over? I think that could be one option or…
Carsten_Stöcker: the other option is so we do two things. we do kind of let's say supporting material where we describe the business wallet use cases and have them in one place just as supporting material. and then in addition so we carve out vocabulary related topics. Yeah.
Ivan_Herman: I think…
Ivan_Herman: what we really concentrate on in this task force is vocabulary related topics. That's what we are working on. We don't want to do general VC related things. that's out there for things that we can discuss on the face toface meeting when we are all together but we have to be careful to focus ourselves to what's really necessary for the task force otherwise we will spend an inordinate amount of time on the use case document…
Carsten_Stöcker: No. No.
Ivan_Herman: which is not really a good idea.
Carsten_Stöcker: I think what makes sense. I think we might want to park this until we meet in Brussels. And then in addition, so we can write a short module in terms of vocabulary related topics. For example, credential chaining. We need this for delegation power of attorney for example that's vocabulary related so we can kind of let's say do separate this out and we leave the rest to Brussels and then we can make a kind of decision if we should kind of merge them somewhere else or whatever we do with it but I think it's important because these use cases physical AI postquantum cryptoc corridors supply chain critical infrastructure they are pretty much under representative and we need
Carsten_Stöcker: to find a home for the business wallet related use cases and I think the intersection of DPPs and business wallets I think can do this here but for all the rest we also need to find a place I would say cool okay for you Ian…
Carsten_Stöcker: if kind of separate out them.
Ivan_Herman: Yeah. Yeah.
Ivan_Herman: I'm sorry. and I think there will be some discussions. I don't remember which day, but there will be some discussion use cases on the facetoface meeting.
Carolynn_Bernier: Coming back to the face toface meeting there was an idea of meeting to talk about vocabularies on the Monday afternoon.
Carolynn_Bernier: Has this been cancelled or this been maintained?
Ivan_Herman: Phil is not around this week.
Ivan_Herman: He organized it. But what he told me last time that there were only two or three persons who said they would be around and…
Ivan_Herman: among the two or three it includes Phil and myself who are not really domain expert anyway.
Ivan_Herman: So it hasn't been formally cancelled, Caroline, but it may die out finally.
Carolynn_Bernier: …
Carolynn_Bernier: I definitely do hope it dies out. I really really do.
Ivan_Herman: Let me try to find the pointer to the
Carolynn_Bernier: And then if I understand the email that Phil sent last week, the official moment to talk about vocabularies is on the Thursday morning. I think Karsten received this meeting as it was either Brent or
Ivan_Herman: BC process. where is the screen here?
Ivan_Herman: What I have is it's not yet the final agenda…
Ivan_Herman: but the best I know and…
Carsten_Stöcker: That's good. Yeah.
<Dr._Susanne_Guth-Orlowski> Did Phil send around an agenda for next week. I might be able to participate on Wednesday.
Ivan_Herman: vocaps is on Thursday indeed but I think I have a meeting with Brent after this course.
<Ivan_Herman> VCWG Brussels F2F 2026 Agenda - Google Sheets
Carolynn_Bernier: morning. Yes.
Ivan_Herman: So if there is anything I should tell him, you tell me because there is also the use case document on Tuesday in the morning.
Carolynn_Bernier: But…
Carolynn_Bernier: what are those Use cases for what?
Ivan_Herman: There is a use case document done by Joe Andrew and I don't know who else on VC use cases which is a relatively old document which it exists and there is a discussion about sort of updating it and I already talked to Brent about the document that was done here that it should be somehow the two should know from one another.
Ivan_Herman: So I would expect this topic coming up on that session.
Carolynn_Bernier: And I see.
Ivan_Herman: No, you might be put on the spot there.
Carolynn_Bernier: Mhm. Suzanne
Dr._Susanne_Guth-Orlowski: Yeah, I was just wondering. So, I thought I had a full week assignment. but it turns out I could be able to join you on Wednesday in Brussels and…
Dr._Susanne_Guth-Orlowski: coming anyway for the dinner on Tuesday evening. is there a possibility to have the dish passport vocabulary discussion on Wednesday or which is now I think scheduled on Thursday or is that a no-go?
Ivan_Herman: From Bren's point of view,…
Ivan_Herman: I presume it doesn't make any difference. So I don't see The question is whether the task force has other constraints or…
Ivan_Herman: not. Yeah,…
Carolynn_Bernier: I think I could make it on my side.
Carolynn_Bernier: I could on Wednesday.
Dr._Susanne_Guth-Orlowski: So…
Dr._Susanne_Guth-Orlowski: if we could do that morning or some somewhere Wednesday through the day that would be perfect because then I could join Mhm.
Ivan_Herman: I am not the one who decides.
Ivan_Herman: So I can be the go between that probably it's better…
Ivan_Herman: if you drop in a mail to Brent and…
<Eva_Blomqvist> Unfortunately not…
Ivan_Herman: and Phil for them to do the change.
Dr._Susanne_Guth-Orlowski: Okay, I'll do that.
Carolynn_Bernier: Is anyone else in this call going to be present in Brussels for all three days,…
<Dr._Susanne_Guth-Orlowski> I am planning to come for the Tuesday Dinner and Wednesday then.
Carsten_Stöcker: I will I'm planning to go to buses.
Ivan_Herman: And it's my job to be there for the three days. Yes.
Carolynn_Bernier: Tuesday to Thursday?
<Ivan_Herman> Latest list of attendees: VCWG Brussels F2F 2026 Attendees - Google Sheets
Carsten_Stöcker: Yeah, depending on the gender.
Carolynn_Bernier: Anybody else?
Carsten_Stöcker: Depending on the gender, but I think if it's distributed across a week, I will be there. Yeah.
Carolynn_Bernier: But it's going to be remote attendance will be possible, Eva will not be there. Reynolds.
Ingo_Wolf: You're muted. Ronald
Ronald_Koenig: Yeah. Yeah, I see For this vocabulary discussion, have we already selected which vocabularies in particular we want to address in this meeting? Because I can only say from our side, we have this European business wallet vocabulary which is currently be specified by the semantic groups in the VU consortio. I know this UNP core vocabulary which defines more or less the DPP core vocabulary. This is something which is defined using at least classes, properties, code list and so on.
Ronald_Koenig: So that means in the same way as we do it for the European business wallet vocabulary and I know Ingo that we have prepared this battery vocabulary right in a way which is fitting to the W3C specification for ontologies and terminologies. So that means this are these three vocabularies we want to discuss about or…
Ronald_Koenig: is there any others which we are not aware of?
Carolynn_Bernier: So there are many core ontologies for DPPS.
<Dr._Susanne_Guth-Orlowski> Thanks, updated my attendance.
Carolynn_Bernier: The UNP have created a core ontology for DPP. Surpass 2 has defined one. EVA has worked on one previously. and there are many other projects that have defined core ontologies for DPP. So if you want I can prepare a kind of a summary of existing core ontologies for DPP that this may be a good starting point right. so
<Ivan_Herman> thanks
Rigo_Wenning: That could be that first of all Phil is hammering on me Colleen to clear the rights on those ontologies. that's The second question is have it today from Pontan. the question whether the CIA ontology is using the SOZA paradigm from the data special on the web working group. there is a sensor and metering ontology called SOSA and they said that they claimed or…
Rigo_Wenning: they were assuming that the SAS 2 ontology is using that which would nicely align stuff but if it's not then we need to look into it.
Rigo_Wenning: So a list of those ontologies would be really nice because then we can look at how they align.
Carolynn_Bernier: Yes. So with Eva,…
Carolynn_Bernier: and Suzanne were actually writing a paper on this topic because Google is also working on their own DPP corontology. there are Corontologies popping up all over the place and They're all designed according to a specific objective. they reuse things, different things, they're all similar but different somehow, right?
Carolynn_Bernier: In the paper we started to write with Suzanne and Eva, we have a list of five or six that we want to compare and to compare in terms of how they align to EU regulations, how they are designed …
Carolynn_Bernier: what is their design principles, what they don't reuse. Ivan.
Ivan_Herman: No, no,…
Ivan_Herman: finish it and then I can
Carolynn_Bernier: So to answer Ronald's question, it may be good to start with a state-of-the-art kind of what already exists in terms of DPP core ontologies and maybe the use cases for me are fundamental because they help us define what it is that we want to achieve with this work in W3C, which I think is creating interoperability
Carolynn_Bernier: between different DPP systems that are proposed in the world because the Chinese are present proposing their DPP system. There are v mandatory schemes and we want to create interoperability between them in order to make data reusable easily whatever the DPP scheme that is being used.
Carolynn_Bernier: Anyways, this is how I envision our work here in W3C.
Carsten_Stöcker: I think we have maybe kind of two different challenges…
Carsten_Stöcker: because in DPPs there's a lot of kind of adjacent activities in surplus in Europe in Google in China United Nations to bring this under one hood I think this is what one key area I think on the business wallet side is a little bit different because this is just from a timing perspective a little bit earlier in the ecosystem. So there's not so much ecosystem. I think in the past people have also started a little bit with the business wallets and vocabularies but I think there was not a big push for this and for that reason I think in terms of dependencies and stakeholder management it might be a little bit simpler with the business wallets. Yeah.
Carsten_Stöcker: and on the business budget side I think the big topic is really to find a partner in APEC in US and then kind of to agree on a base vocabulary for the legal entity for the power of attorney for market roles or…
Carsten_Stöcker: whatever this can be agreed and I think on the DPP side there's more kind of stakeholder management dependency work to be done yeah that's that little bit my understanding for that reason on the business world side it might be a little bit more independent in terms of kind of pushing a base vocabulary in place while you guys have to do more of the stakeholder management. At least that's my understanding.
Carolynn_Bernier: In the DPP world,… we have lots of vocabularies. that we kind of have to like you said bring under a common roof not a single common roof that I'm sure ISOIC JDC5 is going to create their own common roof and that's totally fine it's not a problem whereas what you need to do in the wallet world is to in what other regions of the Carolynn Bernier:
Carolynn_Bernier: world are thinking about business wallets and how they're going about creating data standards for those wallets in India, Japan, everywhere.
Carsten_Stöcker: Yeah. I think Yeah,…
Ronald_Koenig: Ken you said that there are already vocabularies in the US from the business register with respect to legal persons and legal person identity that would very helpful for us to see this one…
Carsten_Stöcker: I think this was Sure.
Ronald_Koenig: because we don't want to reinvent we would like to reuse them and currently the problem what really at least I can only speak for the European business wallet vocabulary. What I see there is that we have a lot of vocabularies available like the EU core vocabulary for example for persons. I have now three or five vocabularies I can list to describe a person starting from schema or…
<Rigo_Wenning> xkcd: Standards
Carolynn_Bernier: Mhm.
Ronald_Koenig: to the core vocabulary to whatever location is the same thing.
Ronald_Koenig: I can describe the location in three or four different ways using different vocabularies and they are not matching with each other. Rigo Wenning:
<Ivan_Herman> Rigo was faster...
Ronald_Koenig: There's no rule how I match let me say a saf to some street address or something like that but it describes semantically the same thing and this is what I believe that we have to look into the different vocabularies we have and try to figure out…
Ronald_Koenig: where we can reuse vocabulary instead of reinventing the wheel for every different district we have or sector. Yeah.
Carsten_Stöcker: Yeah. No,…
Carsten_Stöcker: no, I think that's fine. from my perspective, yeah, you're right. I think DHS has done some, but I think it's a little bit older. In Europe, people have tried to express business wallet vocabularies and roles and delegations of what in the past. Nothing got much momentum, but of course, we can reuse it. Yeah. I think from my perspective not maintained.
Ronald_Koenig: And another issue is this one you say to cast is if I for example look into the EU core vocabularies they are very official but if they are maintained then you will see it is mostly not the case. So that mean this is really a big issue…
Carsten_Stöcker: Absolutely. Yeah.
Ronald_Koenig: because the not maintained vocabulary is completely useless because
Rigo_Wenning: Let go Ivan first. I think I have an answer to that One. Rigo Wenning:
Ivan_Herman: May I?
Carsten_Stöcker: Yeah, Come on.
Ivan_Herman: So if I understand the situation I would put it in a more concentrated manner. what we have to show is how and what are the missing bits to be able to use any of those vocabularies for A credential we are in the verifiable credential working group.
Ivan_Herman: So our goal is to move to prove or show that any of these vocabies they can do whatever they want and we don't control them but how would we use them within a verifiable credentials and what are maybe the missing links the missing features missing terms in the vocabulary maybe that are necessary to be able to integrate the others
Ivan_Herman: Who knows maybe we will end up by not defining a vocabulary at all because the things can be used directly in VC without further ado and we don't have anything to do that's an optimistic view and probably as every optimistic view is probably stupid but we have to concentrate and…
Ivan_Herman: and formulate our own work along the lines of what we can do for verifyable credentials because this is the working room.
Carsten_Stöcker: True. Yeah.
Carsten_Stöcker: But I think it's fine because no problem and maybe we really have to distinguish if you try to put to fit the kind of the methodology for DPSPs and for business wallets the same way. I think from my perspective as Rodan said it,…
Carsten_Stöcker: we look what's there, what can be reused, but we also model what is the base vocabulary that could be reused across the board and then putting this in place. Yeah, I think that's Ronald that's…
Ivan_Herman: Yeah. …
Carsten_Stöcker: what we are primarily kind of trying to achieve, And of course we could blend in a lot of very special European whatever identifiers and here and that but probably on a global level these super special European flavors are probably not really kind of value creating I think the key value creation is a base vocabulary that can be reused from my perspective arona what's your view okay Here we go.
Ivan_Herman: Rio was on the queue. Just let's try to keep the queue.
Carsten_Stöcker: Which core vocabulary you have name for this?
Rigo_Wenning: First of all I think to the core vocabularies those were created by Vasidio Pististeras when he was at DGIT and I think the commission has hunted us for 10 years to maintain it because they are the basos called them the core vocabularies on join up with addresses and…
Carsten_Stöcker: I forgot the name. Okay. Yeah.
Rigo_Wenning: things and all in big data.
Carsten_Stöcker: Yeah. Can you share this?
Rigo_Wenning: So the commission would be more than happy for us to take them the spatial data on the web some other group and retain it. so if we find resources and we find people and companies willing to maintain that there is no obstacle. So that's The second thing is I think it's decisive what Caroline says and this touches on the business wallet as well as on the DPP which is we are sitting on this linked data stack and I mean Ivan and Susanna they know it by heart is the availability to create interoperability in diversity and we are creating
Rigo_Wenning: here this kind of institutional setup to say hey and this is how you use verifiable credentials with their vocabulary provided it's okay and so on but it's also if you have a compound DPP which is a car that has electronics in it and you have electronics DPP and battery DPP. This is how you mix them together. so there is an educational part which is less of a specification, but a working group is also an institutional way to for example create primers and explanatory notes and things like that.
Rigo_Wenning: So we have the ability to create this interoperability not by unification by saying hey please use that please use mine but by saying hey and this is how you can combine them and this is how you secure the combination thereof where Ivan says hey maybe we need this and that thing in addition. just so our goal is not to just make up some vocabulary.
Carsten_Stöcker: Mhm. Yeah. how would you formulate the goal to make a govern to have a govern vocabulary that's being adopted and…
Rigo_Wenning: the No,…
Carsten_Stöcker: adoption is tested. how would you kind of Yes. Mhm.
Rigo_Wenning: you called it a core upper framework on making things work together and I imagine this on a data level less on a protocol level on a system level so it's not yet another framework it's just to tell people hey you talked about this Caroline and we talked about all those vocabularies out there but do
Rigo_Wenning: they really respect the things the principles of linked data. So we can use them. If not, we can state and we can tell look if you want to use this then you need to transform it in that way. And those are things that the group will be confronted with and the use case document kind of scopes us in saying hey this is what we want to achieve. And if you fit in with your vocabulary that you contribute or where we make it work, I wouldn't make just any vocabulary, but that it needs some traction. So the battery vocabulary once it's endorsed by the battery alliance, yeah, then we kind of say, "Hey," and that's how you use it here.
Rigo_Wenning: or the battery license says, "Hey, and by the way, we don't want to put an official stamp on it. please take it up and manage it through the process to get it approved. there is internationalization verification, there's accessibility verification and all of that. so there is work to do. But our thing here is to say, hey, and how does the Chinese and the American one and the European one work
Ivan_Herman: Guys, let's keep to the queue and we have only 15 minutes to go.
Ivan_Herman: So, let's also try to keep it short.
Carsten_Stöcker: Yeah, Ian,…
Carsten_Stöcker: are you next to the queue or who's next?
Ivan_Herman: No, Ronald.
Carsten_Stöcker: Hold on. Sorry.
Ronald_Koenig: That's a short answer with the verifiable credential vocabulary.
Defining Goals for the Working Group
<Dr._Susanne_Guth-Orlowski> Do we have a document where we write down ideas about our "goal definition".
Ronald_Koenig: Yeah, working on this business vocabulary on just to make sure we fit completely into the verifiable credential vocabulary without any problem. If you are using JSON ID and ontology and terminology based on these turtle and RDFS schema then you are fitting completely in. So we don't have any requirement for fy the credential vocabulary. Currently the problem what we really have is that we need some common approach how we describe the credential subjects inside the credential vocabulary completely separated from the verifiable credential vocabulary itself and this is something which is not so easy because usually you want to reuse existing vocabularies but this is only possible if you get
Ronald_Koenig: a vocabulary where you define the semantic area so that you don't have so much overlapping and everybody is trying to explain the same semantic area again and again or semantic domain is a better word for this. So what I wanted to say is with the verifiable credential vocabulary and if this group is concerned about the verifiable credential vocabulary, I have no concerns at all because the vocabulary is well defined with the latest release I have received and is fitting to what we are currently doing with the European business wallet vocabulary.
Dr._Susanne_Guth-Orlowski: So I hear a lot of different ideas of what this working group should do. I hear subject definition. that's fine. No problem at all. We're finding ourselves. But what I would love to see or what we can all maybe profit from is if we have a document where we write down some buzzwords of what we believe we want to achieve with this we can say okay we define a product segment agnostic DPP thing or we can describe how then this is all matched into
Dr._Susanne_Guth-Orlowski: verify the credential or how we have product segment specific descriptions in the subject or how we link to supply chain certificates within a DPP are all that things all good ideas but all different loads of work I guess all different shapes of results that we can produce is there a document where we can collect those ideas just to make sure that we capture the different views of what we actually need.
Carolynn_Bernier: in my so I'm going to respond to Suzanne it for me the use case documents was the place…
Carolynn_Bernier: where we would collectively describe what it is that we're trying to achieve here in this So yes,…
Dr._Susanne_Guth-Orlowski: Is that already somewhere?
Dr._Susanne_Guth-Orlowski: Caroline. Mhm.
Carolynn_Bernier: there is already a draft for the moment. it's 150 pages long and it talks about wallets. So for the moment we have not looked at the use case document structure. we could look at it now. I can share my screen if you want which is very you have to have your GitHub account linked to so this is it here.
Ingo_Wolf: Yes.
Carolynn_Bernier: So as I said this has been populated by Ronald and Ingo I believe with different use cases for the business wallet and these we build consortium work and then from these use cases they define requirements for the wallet but this is not what I expected
Carolynn_Bernier: from this use case document. I expected that it would be less on use cases for wallets and DP DPPS than on use cases where global interoperability between different DPPS or…
Ivan_Herman: All right.
Dr._Susanne_Guth-Orlowski: Ivan.
Carolynn_Bernier: between different wallets is needed. So these use cases are all great. I don't know who Ivan clapped. So these are all great wallet use cases but not wallet international interoperability use cases. And I have had zero time in May to write down my ideas of what I consider to be a use case where you need to create interoperability between different DPPS and different types of wallets. Okay, but this is the type of interoperability we want to create.
Carolynn_Bernier: And I really appreciate what Rio just said. Do we really want to create a new vocabulary? is it really needed to create a new vocabulary?
Dr._Susanne_Guth-Orlowski: Thank you.
Dr._Susanne_Guth-Orlowski: Carolyn Agree.
Carolynn_Bernier: So coming back to the meeting in Brussels, I would think that this would be a great meeting if we could agree on the structure of this future use case document which we have not discussed. For me, this is really the fundamental point. We have to agree what it is that we want to achieve together. And unless we write down what we consider a use case,…
Carolynn_Bernier: we will not understand what we're trying to achieve. Ian
Ivan_Herman: So you said enormous amount of things that I wanted to say…
Ivan_Herman: which is great. I would go one step further simply because I am the only way I understand it is that when I write it down in a program or something equivalent. So I would like to see one or two examples which take some vocabularies of your area and write down a full verifiable credentials without proof etc which is irrelevant from this point of view but to write down a verifiable credential that makes use how would we envisage a VC making use of those vocabularies and what are the obstacles
Ivan_Herman: Ronald may be right that there are no obstacles at all and if there are no obstacles then we can stop working and that's fine. But I see Caroline who is not happy at all. So there are obstacles probably. Yeah. No, I want to see them. I want to understand as an outsider I want to understand what the obstacles are whether those obstacles are in the structure or VC which is not out of the question or whether the obstacles are because there are missing terms that we have to define but I want to see that in practice and take two or three examples one at least one from the DPP and one for the other side the business wallet
Ivan_Herman: side where the fact of doing an integration on the level of VC is the central question and…
Ronald_Koenig: Maybe I can help a little bit.
Ivan_Herman: I would like to see code not really text Ronald I'm sorry Carson was on the queue I'm sorry I don't want to be a pain but there is a good reason All right.
Separating DPP and Business Wallet Activities
Carsten_Stöcker: I know we have to do the…
Carsten_Stöcker: so Ian I think you mentioned one word integration.
Ivan_Herman: Thank
Carsten_Stöcker: Yeah, I think the long-term objective is that we might have an integrated so we have integrated DPP business wallet vocabularies. Yeah. So this is a long-term kind of vision. There are multiple use cases for the business wallets. Many of them DPP is just one of them. Yeah. And I think right now as a group we are pretty much struggling because everyone has a completely different mental model. Everyone has different objectives because on the DBP side there are kind of other objectives and mental models and on the business wallet side and at some point in time you need to integrate them. But I think we should separate both activities to think about two speedboats. Yeah. On the DPP side you address your DPP things with the methodology and your mental model and your objectives. And on the business wallet side we do it the other way around. Yeah.
Carsten_Stöcker: So we basically do the base base vocabulary for business wallets and then of course one of the business wallet use cases a DPP. I'm happy to describe the use cases for DPP and business wallet integration and even on the vocabulary side, but from a business wallet perspective is really to get the basics done to get the whatever to get the basics right and to really have the base vocabulary and as Roland kind of let's say described it as well and then to get rid a little bit of dependencies with the DPP discussion because this is really kind
<Dr._Susanne_Guth-Orlowski> Battery VC Example using the UNTP Logical Model followin DIN /DKE 99100 Spec (not perfect, but good start).
Carsten_Stöcker: I think this is slowing us down. We should treat it as two speed boats from my perspective and then to integrate it later where we have the intersection of business wallet and DPP vocabulary but right now I would really kind of let's say advocate for having two speeds boats and then we can also pick up Rigo's comments. I think they also make sense and we could do it much faster…
<Dr._Susanne_Guth-Orlowski> https://
Carsten_Stöcker: if we focus on the business wallets independently from the DPPs. Yep.
Dr._Susanne_Guth-Orlowski: Yeah. …
Dr._Susanne_Guth-Orlowski: Ken, you just said what I wanted to say. I think that we have completely different use cases for the business wallet than we have for the DPP. I think it's wrong to handle both topics in the same group. I think we need to make two groups out of that. I also believe that we have to check if we need to do anything at all. I just dropped an example of how uses verifiable credentials using the UNP logical model underneath. and I really do not want to create any divergence. So either we do everything in UNP or we do everything under this working group here.
Dr._Susanne_Guth-Orlowski: because we don't have the resources to have two different initiatives. so I agree I think the two DPP and digital wallet use cases are different for different working groups. Mhm.
Carsten_Stöcker: Yeah, of course there will be convergence and…
Carsten_Stöcker: we can handle this a little bit later. Yeah.
Ingo_Wolf: Oops.
Ronald_Koenig: I just wanted to show very quickly my screen here.
Ronald_Koenig: As an answer to what Ian was saying. Yes, I agree completely with you with you. Can you see my screen? Yeah. Okay. This is from the European business wallet vocabulary we're currently working on. And what is the reason that I'm saying that we don't have any problems what you can see is we are using the verifiable credential v2 data model and don't see any issue with it using it and justifying the credential subject which here describes in lengthly identity of a European business to the European business identity including legal representatives or shareholder structures and all the other I'm pretty convinced that W3C verifiable data model provides what we need and the vocabulary which is below this one the VCDM2.0
Ronald_Koenig: zero vocabulary is describing completely what we need and this is not the requirement this is not the issue what we have is and this is what we try to achieve is and I think we should put it also into a international perspective is that we get semantically the same understanding how a business identity is described for example what is a legal name what is a legal representative ownership structure how owner structure looks
Ronald_Koenig: light and so on a semantic level and defining this model and for this one it is interesting to understand the use cases in which we need this information otherwise they will not go into the vocabulary just to share that even I completely agree with you we should really go into the structure and recognize where the problems are and then discussing the semantics and the other one for Sana what we are also trying to achieve is to get the DPPs and the European business wallet identities together.
Ronald_Koenig: For example, in a DPP, we have a manufacturer or economic operator or other roles which have already identities and to combine the identity of a economic operator with the DPP.
Ronald_Koenig: So that the economic operator for example can issue a DPP or can be the holder of a DTP and can prove that for example he is economic operator of a certain battery or something like that. This brings both vocabulary together and should then be reused inside the full vocabulary.
Dr._Susanne_Guth-Orlowski: fully agree.
Dr._Susanne_Guth-Orlowski: I mean, you maybe know the little article I wrote about the DPP use cases for wallets and there you have the registration of a DPP, issuing a DPP, verifying a DPP and for all of those you need wallets. Yeah, that's the intersection. Ronald Koenig:
Ronald_Koenig: And that we have in German in Europe now this DPP registry where we have to authenticate against the DPP registry before we can register any DPP and…
Ronald_Koenig: so on and there is where I see both things comes together.
Dr._Susanne_Guth-Orlowski: Yeah, absolutely.
Dr._Susanne_Guth-Orlowski: You're also raising your hand.
Rigo_Wenning: Yes I think the business vocabulary is just one part and mentioned it where the DPP is much larger than the business wallet. Those are not two distinct things because the DPP necessary will require a European business wallet or a business wallet where your factory identification and so on will be serialized in some way. So the business wallet case is just another application oriented vocabulary.
Rigo_Wenning: we see which has two consequences. Seeing it this is you can see the DPP as a function of the business wallet because you kind of integrate the DPP information into your business wallet or you can the other way around. You can say hey in your DPP there is a business wallet to identify the legal entity and the factory and the economic operator.
Rigo_Wenning: clearing this kind of going from B to A is function is precisely the goal of this group saying hey what do the business world for me is something that can stand on its own that we use in the DPP and we just have to make sure that we don't have to meet to that we don't have too much friction with it on your quest to get a legal entity ontology. just one question. Do you believe that a French society anonym are the same thing? These are legal considerations. You can't solve them in vocabulary because the variety in the world is too large.
Rigo_Wenning: the question here and that's my attorney hat is how do we get up to a level where we allow people to have a blob when you say this is legal entity and this is how you integrate your name space because I am registered in the hund register and I'm not registered in a regist so you have a name space for the registmer and then the application logic will follow and say hey and then we can find off or we can discover something in the register the commerce or something in the hands register which is nice but we need to get up to a level…
Ronald_Koenig: Yeah, but maybe even first
Ivan_Herman: Excuse me.
Rigo_Wenning: where we are not in the weeds of this legal entity thinking what is a Delaware corporation
Semantic Interoperability and Data Sovereignty
Ivan_Herman: Excuse me.
<Dr._Susanne_Guth-Orlowski> https://
Dr._Susanne_Guth-Orlowski: We have Eva.
Ivan_Herman: On the one hand on the other hand we are running out of time. I am looking at the document that Susan showed and I am just looking at it and I see the kind of examples that we have to think about is the JSON file that you put in the chat Susanna.
Dr._Susanne_Guth-Orlowski: Mhm. Yeah.
Ivan_Herman: So obviously whatever isn't a credential subject is part of the vocabulary that we are discussing and it works and it's fine and no problem about that. But as far as I can understand, your business logic requires terms that are not in the credential subject, but they are not, as far as I know, part of the VC vocabulary. You have something which is called issuing software, which I don't think is in the VC vocabulary. You have issuer, also known as a kind of an alias to an issuer.
Ivan_Herman: These are terms that are currently not in the VC vocabulary and that's fine. from a JSON LD point of view it works because they are defined in another vocabulary. But my editor would say if these terms are of a general usage they should be put into the extended version of the vocabulary not being part of a specific vocabulary for one specific application area. These are the kind of distortions that I'm looking for and this is typically thing that we have to understand where these discrepancies are and we have to go back to the VC working group by saying your vocabulary is not complete because in and these use cases there are requirements on the VC structure in general that are not covered by the current VC vocabulary.
Ingo_Wolf: Thank you. Bye.
Ivan_Herman: I mean this is something that we have to understand…
Dr._Susanne_Guth-Orlowski: Yeah. Amazing.
Ivan_Herman: but at this point I have to go…
Ivan_Herman: because I have a meeting.
Dr._Susanne_Guth-Orlowski: Thank you, and I knew that if we look at code, then we start talking.
Ivan_Herman: Yes, we have to look at code.
Dr._Susanne_Guth-Orlowski: The only way.
Ivan_Herman: Thank you very much everyone. I have to go.
Dr._Susanne_Guth-Orlowski: Thank you.
Carsten_Stöcker: Bye-bye. Hey Caroline,…
Carolynn_Bernier: Hi Carson.
Carsten_Stöcker: we might want to discuss to separate this.
Carsten_Stöcker: I think otherwise this is too complex.
Carolynn_Bernier: I think that I'm getting to this.
Carolynn_Bernier: In a sense, it's a shame because the link between DPP and wallets, there are so many links. In a sense, it's a shame like what Rio said about, referring to a wallet from a DPP or putting a DPP in a wallet, that this needs to be somehow explained in some, right?
Carsten_Stöcker: Yeah. I think it's totally fine if we have let's say one dedicated activity to define the intersections. Yeah.
Carsten_Stöcker: But then to really focus joint work on the definition of the intersections I think is very focused and…
Carolynn_Bernier: Yeah. Yeah, Ronald.
Carsten_Stöcker: targeted and then with other vocabularies I think we can spread a little bit out and I think it's along these priorities registration registering DPPs access control for markets balance authorities and…
Carsten_Stöcker: supply chain actors and provenence of the data in a DPP and for DPP data integrity I think this use case are quickly defined.
Ronald_Koenig: car maybe note for this one…
Carsten_Stöcker: But we have the totally other use case for the business wallets as well.
Ronald_Koenig: because I'm not completely agree with Rio on this one because my understanding is that we have European business wallets And we are holding in this business identity credentials at the stations or verifiable credentials however you want to call or of course also DPP credentials.
Ronald_Koenig: So if I for example are a manufacturer of a DPP and issue this one or carbon footprint DPP to another company to prove that something is for example certified the production process or then I'm issuing it into the European business wallet of the other company so that this company can present it to someone else to prove for example that the production process which was evolated by some institutes or something like that he can prove against the third one that the carbon footprint generated with this manufacturing process is at this level. So what I mean with this one is we really have the model that we don't care is it a DPP credential is it a business credential is it a location credential is it whatever credential we hold all this credential inside the wallet
Ronald_Koenig: Because a wallet gives us just the infrastructure where we can have creates the trust model and the trust anchor for this different credentials and the credential content itself decides what the semantic is what I want to express in this one. I can express the identity of a company in verifiable credential or the carbon footprint of the product XY Z as long as I can bind it to the holder of this one because this makes the sense of the wallet because I have the private key material managed in my wallet and I can prove against someone else that I'm the holder and that the statements are about me or a product which I have produced because I'm mentioned as manufacturer inside
Ronald_Koenig: is PPP for example we said that a wallet can be used inside the DPP it's not my understanding a wallet is the foundation…
Carolynn_Bernier: …
Carolynn_Bernier: so why do you disagree with what Rigo said? You could that's yes…
Ronald_Koenig: where I hold different credential whatever the credentials
Carolynn_Bernier: but you could also use the vocabularies that you will define to describe an organization in the wallet EUCC kind of company certificate type of attestation you can use these vocabularies in a DPP it…
Ingo_Wolf: Oops.
Carolynn_Bernier: which doesn't have to be issued as a vocabulary as a verifiable credential,…
Ronald_Koenig: Yeah. Yeah.
Ronald_Koenig: But this has nothing to do with the wallet.
Carolynn_Bernier: right? Yeah.
Ronald_Koenig: My understanding is you can use any vocabulary and mix it with other vocabularies because ontology is by the open word, right? You can extend it by using other vocabularies and…
Carolynn_Bernier: Yes. Yes.
Ronald_Koenig: combine them. Just take the context into this JSON ID for example and…
Carolynn_Bernier: Yep. Exactly. But the value…
Ronald_Koenig: that works.
Carolynn_Bernier: but the value of the defining vocabularies for wallets or not actually for wallets but for business attestations that will be in wallets is that these vocabularies can be reused in DPPS.
Ronald_Koenig: Yeah, completely.
Carolynn_Bernier: But our work…
Ronald_Koenig: But as you say this has nothing to do with that DPP is using a wallet or a European or identity credential is using the wallet. This is just the infrastructure the tool where we manage this one where we retrieve credentials present credentials manage credentials and so on and really easy Yeah,…
<Eva_Blomqvist> I need to go as well now. Thanks!
Vocabulary Role in Digital Product Passports
Carolynn_Bernier: but our work here in this vocabulary task force is not so much on the wallet infrastructure. It's more on the vocabularies themselves. No.
Ronald_Koenig: this is what I would like to understand because if we are discussing wallets, I think we should have a wallet expert group a working group or something.
Ronald_Koenig: I thought that we are discussing here vocabularies. At least this was what was the first statement when we created this group that we would like to understand the content of the vocabularies define the semantically so that they are comparable and can be reused in different use cases. This was my understanding and then therefore maybe I like the idea to separate issues but on the other side I think that the business identity vocabulary is something which is related or should be reused in a DPP vocabulary for example for manufacturer economic operator and all the other things.
Ronald_Koenig: And on the other side, I think maybe it that we have is the Switzer railway project currently where we have supply chain use case where we have the whole life cycle of the manufacturing of a rail and with carbon footprint and all the others. So that means we have real use case along this supply chain a lot of credentials which are DPP credentials which are carbon footprint credentials which are identity credentials and all they are linked to each other and working on top of the European business wallet.
Ronald_Koenig: In our case of the European business wallet, but it should be the business wallet at all because it is a dimensional business.
Carolynn_Bernier: But it's not so much the cap capacity to link credentials with one another that is the focus of this work…
Carolynn_Bernier: because linked credentials is the focus of another task force within the verifiable credentials work group. If I understand correctly, for me it's more on how vocabularies from a domain can be used by another domain in the context of verifiable credentials. So this is why for example what I consider to be a use case is exactly reusing vocabularies from a business credential domain in the DPP domain that for me defines a use case or reusing data from why did my PC go dark suddenly I cannot see anymore. here you are.
<Dr._Susanne_Guth-Orlowski> I have to jump. Have a nice evening.
Carolynn_Bernier: reusing data from a UNP DPP and linking a re reusing data from different DPPs. I'm receiving a UNP DPP and I'm receiving a EU DPP and I want to reuse this data unambiguously. How do I do that?
Ronald_Koenig: All right.
Carolynn_Bernier: Because we know that the EU vocabularies will be imposed by the European Commission. The mandatory vocabularies, they will be imposed by the European Commission. the W3C vocabularies so I like the idea that what we don't want to create new vocabularies. We want to explain how the EU can be combined with vocabularies from China and…
Carolynn_Bernier: vocabularies from all over the world and how we can combine this data together. For me, that's the goal.
Ronald_Koenig: Yeah, this is one facet.
Ronald_Koenig: Let me say it this way. I completely agree with you Caroline because what we have to figure out is for DPPS …
Ronald_Koenig: what are the common terms which should not be redefined by any DPP again. We'll get back.
Carolynn_Bernier: No, no,…
Carolynn_Bernier: no, no, no, no, no, no, no. We don't need common terms. We don't need common terms. We just have to explain how terms can map to each other because there will always be somebody else to define a new DPP vocab and a new DPP vocab. there will always be more vocabularies. and we can't force the European Commission to use the W3C terms, They will define their own terms. and these terms will be mandatory. If I want to issue my passport as a EU DPP, I need to refer to the European Commission vocabularies.
<Carsten_Stöcker> I need to leave. And will follow up with you soon.
Carolynn_Bernier: So we have to explain how the W3C creates interoperability between different vocabulary systems, between different DPP systems,…
Carolynn_Bernier: between EUDP and UNPDP. It's not about creating another vocabulary.
Ronald_Koenig: No, no,…
Ronald_Koenig: no. I don't get it to be honest. If you say okay, everybody can define its own vocabulary and we just need to provide a mapping between them means nobody is reusing something because the only thing what everybody is defining its own vocabulary. For example, if I have one says, okay, this is a manufacturer and the other side this is a producer and the other side says that is this one and then we have some mapping rules which have to define between the different vocabularies that a manufacturer and a producer is equivalent term of the same thing.
Carolynn_Bernier: But do you really think China will reuse European vocabularies? I don't think so. when they create their own vocabularies, they will create vocabularies and…
Carolynn_Bernier: the Europe will create data. eu vocabularies and…
Ronald_Koenig: But car…
Carolynn_Bernier: the …
Ronald_Koenig: but I don't understand with it then the guy who is doing the mapping and who maintains the mapping between this and if we don't agreement on a certain level that we are using the same common vocabulary if we talk to each Now I don't like the idea of let me say it this way a base vocabulary.
Carolynn_Bernier: for me this is the work of the group is to create these mappings. If we need to create these mappings, if we need to create what you call the base vocabulary, okay, to do the mapping, we can do that.
Ronald_Koenig: Let me take this example from the core vocabulary.
Ronald_Koenig: There's a definition of manufacturer and there's already a definition of economic operator and a definition of whatever and there's a vocabulary which is quite long. Let me say it this way. And the next one is then the battery vocabulary or fashion vocabulary or automotive vocabulary or whatever. And everybody starts from the beginning on defining every term again and then expecting that someone indeed is it not better to say okay we have this UNP core vocabulary and if I start thinking about a battery vocabulary I try to understand which vocabulary already exists not reinventing it or reusing it.
Ronald_Koenig: This is what I'm asking for.
Carolynn_Bernier: Yes, but the commission will not reuse UNCE vocabularies for their mandatory DPP data. So the problem is going to come
Ronald_Koenig: But on the other hand we should provide a mapping between both but we have two authorities. One is maintaining the UNP vocabulary and the other one is maintaining the EU whatever vocabulary and then we provide a mapping and this mapping is valid for how long until one of this authority decides to change the vocabulary because we have no authority itself that we can provide a mapping…
Ronald_Koenig: because we have no control over the one vocabulary as well as the other one or maybe we have the
Ronald_Koenig: control over one vocabulary but not about both. And therefore the map will be changed frequently.
Carolynn_Bernier: I agree.
Carolynn_Bernier: So this is what a W3C base vocabulary may be useful because that way if one of them decides to change something. It throws off the mapping, it doesn't throw everything off.
Carolynn_Bernier: It only throws off the mapping between our base vocabulary and that standard that has changed.
Ronald_Koenig: What I can only say…
Ronald_Koenig: what we try in the European business vocabulary currently and I'm really pushing forward that we get it done.
Ronald_Koenig: I don't want to invent the wheel one but one again because we have a lot of vocabul for example country codes for example jurisdictions for example inso terms for there are so many vocabularies already existing…
Carolynn_Bernier: But yeah,…
Carolynn_Bernier: and they'll be more when the US starts, becoming active in their own business vocabularies.
Ronald_Koenig: then maybe we should really get an agreement on some level that
Ronald_Koenig: wants to use one vocabular all of them because we have a semantic already already in this is…
Ronald_Koenig: what we are really trying I have a section here where we have I don't know country codes currencies for example if I reinvent this one there are 200 currencies in the world I have to reflect for this one of course I'm using a controlled vocabulary and not reinventing the wheel again n 21 codes and by the way this is for example economic activity of a company. Do you know how many different coders we already have?
Carolynn_Bernier: Are you certain that the commission will not step in one day and say business wallet vocabularies will be hosted by European Commission and…
Carolynn_Bernier: we will define what those vocabularies are. Are you certain that they will not do this? because they have done it for the DPP. They have just done it.
Ronald_Koenig: I completely agree with you.
Ronald_Koenig: I cannot be certain because I cannot control it. But on the other hand is what we are getting from the industry in Germany says okay if you are not getting something which is agreed on an international level we will not use it because our business is not stopping at the border of Europe. So if we are really say we are and nobody else knows us then we have a problem because we cannot do international business.
Ronald_Koenig: And by the way there are some things where they have already lost for example the legal entity identifier…
Ronald_Koenig: which is harmonized by the GLE is an international organization. Europe cannot do anything about it because it is already done and I think this is more or less a model we need for international business otherwise it will not be used at least not for international business.
Carolynn_Bernier: From the moment that you have to refer to a specific legally defined vocabulary to be compliant for example for a European DPP I can assume that the reference to the vocabularies defined by the commission will be mandatory…
Carolynn_Bernier: because this is what it would make sense. So that an EUPPP must reference those vocabularies that will be hosted and defined by the European Commission. because that's what the registry implementing act says that there will be a semantic repository with all of these vocabularies defined there. So I assume that to be compliant to the EU DPP you will have to refer to those vocabularies. So that means that the vocab I think businesses will be comfortable in using vocabularies if there are either hosted by a country or the European Commission so they're stable right or…
Carolynn_Bernier: by an international standardization organization like ISO IEC or W3C. That's the only con two conditions that industry will use these vocabularies.
Ronald_Koenig: and…
Ronald_Koenig: Caroline you understand why I'm saying okay it's nice that the W3C credential working group was taking care of this one the first thing what I did I moved over to W3 3 ID.org
Ronald_Koenig: or European business wallet vocabulary because this is an internationally perma link which is maintained on the international level but could happen and therefore I say I'm not certain that we get a strong request to move it over again into a European domain or something like that because it needs to be under the control of the European Union but then we get the same problem with the DPPs what I'm currently seeing if I import a product from China then someone has to register the DPP for this product from China, And this is then the importing company and not the company which is producing this one and this is generating a lot of overhead because not the company who produced this product is responsible for the DPP.
Ronald_Koenig: So then someone who wants to import it into the European Union because we have set up a war around the European Union this way.
Ronald_Koenig: And is this really the way we want to go? I'm not sure.
Carolynn_Bernier: I'm trying I'm like you,…
Carolynn_Bernier: Ronaldo. I'm trying to figure out what it means for importers and how for a same product you could have several DPPS and you could resolve to whatever DPP you need depending on your location, So with resolution you could resolve to whatever DPP you want depending on where you are on the planet right so if you need to resolve to the EU DPP that cites the right context then you can do that right that's one possibility and hopefully we can do that with smart resolvers or we can do that with other approaches know I don't know if a graph can contain concepts that are the same but site
Carolynn_Bernier: different vocabularies. I don't know. But I'm trying to understand how for the moment we only have a single mandatory DPP. It's the EU one. But you can be sure that in a few years there will be going to be more mandatory DPPS all over the place in Vietnam etc. So we have to anticipate how this can work and be easy for economic operators. But in any case, it seems logical that a regulator has control of the data that is considered mandatory in their jurisdiction.
Carolynn_Bernier: So it's normal that the Chinese DPPs and have mandatory EU DPPS and they create laws on how the EU PP the Chinese DPP should look It seems normal. This is normal. This is data sovereignty or it's sovereignty. So we have to make it easy for companies to create these different DPPs and whatever DPP I get when I get a product it could be mandatory in China. So I might get a product imported from China with a Chinese DPP.
Carolynn_Bernier: That's fine. I want to reuse that data. so exactly.
Ronald_Koenig: As long as you don't use this data,…
Ronald_Koenig: it's But if you have to understand the semantic, then you have to get anyway agreement about the semantic and then you are starting this mapping job, right? Because then you map it to someone to some semantic you have in Germany and…
Carolynn_Bernier: Yes. Yes.
Ronald_Koenig: then whenever something change then you have to map again and then okay Leo gave an example… Carolynn Bernier:
Carolynn_Bernier: Yeah. Yeah. Chinese semantics to W3C base what we call base semantics and then W3C to EU DPP mapping. Mhm.
Ronald_Koenig: therefore I'm not immediately jumping on this one because he said do you really believe that we
Ronald_Koenig: get the agreement between French and German with respect to what the legal form of a company is. Of course, we have because with the anti-moneyre, I have to really understand what the legal form of a French company is in the context of opening a bank account. I have to understand what semantically and we have to get this which semantically define how the processing for the antimoney launder is done with respect to this one.
Ronald_Koenig: Therefore, for example, we are discussing with infograph the French business register to get an agreement about the semantic terms we are using if we send KYC data from French to Germany. Otherwise, we cannot open a bank account in Europe.
Carolynn_Bernier: Mhm. Yeah.
Ronald_Koenig: This is what we have Today we have three weeks if you want to open a corporate account in abroad because they have to lead everything and…
Ingo_Wolf: Thank you.
Ronald_Koenig: the human being has to look into it.
Carolynn_Bernier: So I don't know
Carolynn_Bernier: how familiar Rigo is with the business wallet work.
Ronald_Koenig: No, what I just wanted to say with this one Caroline is not…
Carolynn_Bernier: I know
Ronald_Koenig: what Ego was saying is at the end maybe we should really start discussing semantic not locally on discussing semantically in the European scale or better in the international scale. And I was by the way really surprised about when we were here in Berlin in this conference how many Chinese and Japanese companies were on our booth to get information about the European wallet and the European business identity because most of them are very interested to get this information because business is international.
Ronald_Koenig: delivery cars for example to Germany there are a lot of obligation they have to fulfill and…
Ronald_Koenig: to make this easier is also sensible for them and then they are really looking into what we are doing here so it is not completely separated this is what I wanted to say and maybe we should take this opportunity really to get international vocabulary for whenever possible let me say it this way is it not possible then we have to go through this mapping anyway
Carolynn_Bernier: It's always nice…
Carolynn_Bernier: if everybody uses the same standard but what I saw in the DPP world is that everybody created their own vocabulary and this will continue to happen all the time it continue and continue to happen. So the idea that everybody will all agree to use the same vocabularies I can't believe that that's going to happen. Maybe in the wallet world because maybe Europe is ahead of the other countries maybe you will be able to say look we have wonderful business wallet vocabularies please reuse ours and then the entire world will align to your vocabularies and that would be great but I can't see that happening in the DPP world.
Carolynn_Bernier: Already we have two sets of vobies, the EU vocabularies and the UNP vocabularies. So we already have two very welldefined vocabularies that They will not merge. and They can't merge. So our work here in W3C is to create the mappings. There's no other solution.
Ronald_Koenig: Then it's the question why they should trust this mapping. If they don't trust the vocabulary which is maintained by the W3C then why they should trust the mapping? Okay, maybe the work has to be done but on the other side this also means that everybody has to implement the semantic of both sides right and to provide a mapping so that they can implement what the other side is is semantically defining with another vocabulary.
Ronald_Koenig: Yeah, maybe it is really something. But is it the work of this group to provide some mapping from this one? Was this really the goal that we have DPP for China and the automative DPP for China or battery DPP for China and the DE battery DPP in Europe and then providing the WCC is then providing the mapping between it.
Carolynn_Bernier: How can you stop a government somewhere from saying this is the mandatory DPP in China or in Brazil or wherever or…
Carolynn_Bernier: in the US. It must reference those vocabularies. How can you prevent that?
Ronald_Koenig: maybe you are right…
Ronald_Koenig: but currently I'm a little bit confused about it why we are using semantic at all because the problem that I have now is and this is a long argument but is going forward if we are using just JSON and provide
Ronald_Koenig: local meaning to the parameters we are using in our domain. So for example for China and for things and so on. Then we need this mapping every time and everywhere. Yeah. And this is by the way what the SON ID when the JSON says okay they define semantic of course but they are defining it only locally with a definition of a document…
Ronald_Koenig: which describes this one. If we have this mapping then what is the use of providing semantic interoperability using JSON ID? But forget this question. This was just that I have to think about it.
Carolynn_Bernier: I will refer you to an article I wrote on this topic.
Carolynn_Bernier: Here and where is the chat that I can put the thing in the chat here. I wrote this article on the role of standardization organizations for creating semantic interoperability for DPP. And is it chapter two? talks about the levels of semantic interoperability for DPP that exist today. So there are five levels template based semantics embedded semantic references resolvable vocabularies. 2.4 is JSONLDD and…
Ronald_Koenig: No.
Carolynn_Bernier: 2.5 is ontology based interoperability. So basically the first three are Jason the fourth is fourth and the fifth are Jason El so we can talk about that Why do we need dissolvable vocabularies?
Carolynn_Bernier: what is the point right the point is that we want to reap the economic benefits of semantic interoperability which is chapter 1.5 and remove the data integration semantic conflicts that emerge if you don't have these such mechanisms right data integration chapter 1.3 the different types of semantic conflicts that arise when you try to integrate data from multiple sources and it just explodes because you have semantic conflicts and all sorts of conflicts. So this is what we wanted to achieve here. we want to make it easy to reuse data from multiple sources and multiple sources can be wallet attestations and DPPS and claims and certifications and all sorts of data that's coming at you right from all over the world.
<Carolynn_Bernier> The role of Standards Developing Organisations (SDO) in the achievement of semantic interoperability for DPP
Carolynn_Bernier: from all over the world. and I want to integrate all this data in my system and I don't want it to explode. So, for me, this is what we're trying to achieve here. Make it easy to reuse data in to do other things. so semantic interoperability is about making context explicit first of all but not only making it context explicit. If you have a template then the context is explicit but doesn't mean that the context is easy to exploit. Right?
Carolynn_Bernier: So you need context to become explicit, but you want the flexibility from a template free approach. We don't want templates because templates are too difficult to adapt to new needs. In the wallet world, I think you still have a vision of, A certificate contains that data.
Carolynn_Bernier: So, you kind of view the attestations as a kind of a template.
Ronald_Koenig: You should not say…
Ronald_Koenig: what if you look to SD job PC, I agree with you because this is JSON. So they want to have a template and they want data validation before they are interpreting the data.
Ronald_Koenig: But if you look to WCC credentials by the way we prefer is of course that we have the open word of semantic definition. So that means we are not doing validation before we process the data. Yeah.
Carolynn_Bernier: Yeah, but you are a minority in the wallet world.
Carolynn_Bernier: But Ronald, you're a minority in the wallet world. Unfortunately, I know Michael from the Finnish tax other he's all depressed,…
Ronald_Koenig: Unfortunately, Yeah.
Carolynn_Bernier: regularly very depressed. And when he saw the DPP registry act, he said and with its reference to semantic interoperability and semantic repositories and vocabularies and authorities like wow, I wish we had that for the wallet, right? But anyways, yeah, but
Ronald_Koenig: Maybe we take it this way. So that means that But I'm not sure that this group is really doing this mapping word.
Ronald_Koenig: But what I believe is we have to look into this charter again and then really figure out what the task of this group is. because we have more or…
Ronald_Koenig: less we have contributed more or less the European business vocab vocabulary to this one. we have contributed the battery vocabulary which we have done using ontologies and terminologies and yeah I'm not sure really what kind the goal of the group is we are Welcome.
Carolynn_Bernier: I'm very happy we disagree on…
Carolynn_Bernier: what the objective of this group is. I'm happy because this is stimulating what is it that we're trying to achieve and this is where the interesting conversation happens is happening I think so I'm very happy that we're taking the time to say what is it that we're actually trying to achieve and I think that indeed splitting the work between separating the wallet work from the GPP work may be necessary because yeah I
Carolynn_Bernier: think it may be necessary in the future because it's too different that we're not at the same place but I think even in the wallet world the hope that the entire world will align to European business vocabularies I don't know I don't know how reasonable this hope is I know this is what you're hoping that the entire world will align so that W3C will just take all the EU vocabularies and…
Carolynn_Bernier: say these are the W3C vocabularies and then the entire world will adopt them. if that happens then that's good for you. But in the DPP world, it won't happen. It cannot happen.
Ronald_Koenig: Let me say…
Ronald_Koenig: what was my intention when someone asked me why to go to W3C and the reason for this one is the situation in Europe they are not using ontologies or terminology at
Ronald_Koenig: all they are doing at ST just writing ISO specification with simple tables where they define the meaning and says okay this is…
Carolynn_Bernier: It's a template based approach.
Carolynn_Bernier: Yeah. Yeah.
Ronald_Koenig: what we have so we are not really finding where we can anchor this one I get an anchor where I can put it in and say okay at least we have some standardization body which says okay taking care of the vocabulary is much better than what we currently have in Europe and that's my real concern about it it's not really that we have to be international.
Ronald_Koenig: This is let me say a side effect which I believe would be very nice if we get a vocabulary which is also accepted outside of Europe because we have international business and it's maybe also something by the way it is also in the European business model proposal there's chapter 17 and…
Ronald_Koenig: 18 which talks about how do you get the trust model extended beyond the border of Europe because business is beyond Europe right for all the companies Okay.
Carolynn_Bernier: Yes. The trust model and…
Carolynn_Bernier: the semantics.
Ronald_Koenig: So we have to expand it. So that mean the trust model is one thing…
Ronald_Koenig: but this is what you can reach if you have mutual recognition or something like that. But how do you get the semantic interoperability?
Carolynn_Bernier: That's Yeah.
Carolynn_Bernier: Yeah. Yeah. And ex Exactly.
Ronald_Koenig: If you have two different languages, right?
Ronald_Koenig: Nobody understands the other.
Carolynn_Bernier: So for me the work in W3C was about building interoperability between different business vocabularies used in different sections of the world. But if you manage to convince the entire planet to reuse your vocabularies, then you don't have to do these mappings, then you see. Ronald Koenig:
Ronald_Koenig: Is this a …
Carolynn_Bernier: But I doubt that that will happen. I doubt it. I have to catch a train to So I Byebye.
Ronald_Koenig: nice talking to you.
Ingo_Wolf: Thank you for the extended time slot.
Ingo_Wolf: You next time. What is it?
Ronald_Koenig: Yong. Meeting ended after 01:46:05 👋 This editable transcript was computer generated and might contain errors. People can also change the text after it was created.