Special call minutes Jan 16

_minutes/2024-01-16-vcwg-special.md

@@ -0,0 +1,317 @@
+---
+layout: minutes
+date: 2024-01-16
+title: Verifiable Credentials Working Group Special Topic Call on Outstanding Issues/PRs — 2024-01-16
+json-ld: |
+ {
+ "@context": [
+ "https://schema.org",
+ {
+ "resolution": {
+ "@id": "https://w3c.github.io/scribejs/vocab/resolution",
+ "@context": {
+ "@vocab": "https://w3c.github.io/scribejs/vocab/"
+ }
+ },
+ "irc": {
+ "@id": "https://w3c.github.io/scribejs/vocab/irc"
+ }
+ }
+ ],
+ "@type": "CreativeWork",
+ "url": "https://www.w3.org/2017/vc/WG/Meetings/Minutes/2024-01-16-vcwg-special",
+ "name": "Verifiable Credentials Working Group Special Topic Call on Outstanding Issues/PRs — Minutes",
+ "about": "Verifiable Credentials Working Group Special Topic Call on Outstanding Issues/PRs",
+ "dateCreated": "2024-01-16",
+ "irc": "vcwg-special",
+ "datePublished": "2024-01-17",
+ "genre": "Meeting Minutes",
+ "accessMode": "textual",
+ "accessModeSufficient": "textual",
+ "encodingFormat": "text/html",
+ "publisher": {
+ "@type": "Organization",
+ "name": "World Wide Web Consortium",
+ "url": "https://www.w3.org/"
+ },
+ "inLanguage": "en-US",
+ "recordedAt": {
+ "@type": "Event",
+ "name": "Verifiable Credentials Working Group Special Topic Call on Outstanding Issues/PRs",
+ "startDate": "2024-01-16",
+ "endDate": "2024-01-16",
+ "location": {
+ "@type": "VirtualLocation",
+ "description": "Teleconference"
+ },
+ "attendee": [
+ {
+ "@type": "OrganizationRole",
+ "roleName": "chair",
+ "attendee": [
+ {
+ "@type": "Person",
+ "name": "Brent Zundel"
+ }
+ ]
+ },
+ {
+ "@type": "OrganizationRole",
+ "roleName": "scribe",
+ "attendee": [
+ {
+ "@type": "Person",
+ "name": "Andres Uribe"
+ }
+ ]
+ },
+ {
+ "@type": "Person",
+ "name": "Hiroyuki Sano"
+ },
+ {
+ "@type": "Person",
+ "name": "Ted Thibodeau Jr."
+ },
+ {
+ "@type": "Person",
+ "name": "Dave Longley"
+ },
+ {
+ "@type": "Person",
+ "name": "Wesley Smith"
+ },
+ {
+ "@type": "Person",
+ "name": "Dmitri Zagidulin"
+ },
+ {
+ "@type": "Person",
+ "name": "Joe Andrieu"
+ },
+ {
+ "@type": "Person",
+ "name": "Gabe Cohen"
+ },
+ {
+ "@type": "Person",
+ "name": "Will Abramson"
+ }
+ ]
+ }
+ }
+
+---
+
+# Verifiable Credentials Working Group Special Topic Call on Outstanding Issues/PRs — Minutes
+{: .no_toc}
+
+
+
+**Date:** 2024-01-16
+
+See also the [Agenda](https://www.w3.org/events/meetings/eaf86734-c2f9-410e-86b9-1cca18d0d6c9/20240116T180000/) and the [IRC Log](https://www.w3.org/2024/01/16-vcwg-special-irc.txt)
+
+## Attendees
+{: .no_toc}
+**Present:** Brent Zundel, Hiroyuki Sano, Ted Thibodeau Jr., Andres Uribe, Dave Longley, Wesley Smith, Dmitri Zagidulin, Joe Andrieu, Gabe Cohen, Will Abramson
+
+**Regrets:** 
+
+**Guests:** 
+
+**Chair:** Brent Zundel
+
+**Scribe(s):** Andres Uribe
+
+## Content:
+{: .no_toc}
+
+* TOC
+{:toc}
+---
+
+
+### 1. Privacy WG announcement.
+{: #section1}
+
+**Brent Zundel:** Wes, welcome to the group. 
+… manu, can you talk through this? 
+
+> *Manu Sporny:* W3C Privacy WG Charter: [https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-credentials/2024Jan/0027.html](https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-credentials/2024Jan/0027.html).
+
+**Manu Sporny:** Privacy WG announcement heads up. The W3C privacy charter is under vote. It closes in the next 24 hours. 
+… Their work is relevant across multiple groups. 
+… An official privacy group would carry more weight. 
+… Heads up that the vote is open and will close soon. 
+
+**Brent Zundel:** Do you know if the group is alongside the privacy interest group, or a replacement? 
+
+**Manu Sporny:** I don't know. I thought the PING was going away and the new group would be the official group. The first document they'd deliver is "don't resell my data" as an HTTP header. 
+… It's similar to do-not-track, but designed with the new privacy regulations in mind. 
+… If PING stays around, it will act as a CG. 
+… The new group is expected to publish TR. 
+
+> *Ted Thibodeau Jr.:* "This proposed Working Group would replace the Interest Group." is the last sentence of section 1 of the proposed charter.
+
+**Ted Thibodeau Jr.:** it's in the charter that it's replacing the interest group. There is also a community group. 
+
+**Brent Zundel:** Sounds like producing docs is the direction they're heading. 
+
+> *Ted Thibodeau Jr.:* also -- "Teleconferences: every 2 weeks, as needed, alternating with PrivacyCG meetings." So CG and WG will coexist.
+
+### 2. Bitstring Status List Issues.
+{: #section2}
+
+> *Brent Zundel:* [https://github.com/w3c/vc-bitstring-status-list/issues?q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+label%3Abefore-CR+sort%3Aupdated-asc](https://github.com/w3c/vc-bitstring-status-list/issues?q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+label%3Abefore-CR+sort%3Aupdated-asc).
+
+#### 2.1. TAG Review Request -- Submitted (issue vc-bitstring-status-list#72)
+{: #section2-1}
+
+_See github issue [vc-bitstring-status-list#72](https://github.com/w3c/vc-bitstring-status-list/issues/72)._
+
+<!-- issue w3c/vc-bitstring-status-list/72 -->
+
+
+
+**Brent Zundel:** Moving to our first issue. Goal is to share status, and to help forward as needed. 
+… have we heard back from TAG? 
+
+**Manu Sporny:** I don't know. I was going to say 72 and 77 are tracking issues. 
+… We requested back in July. So we can proceed as they've timed out. 
+
+**Brent Zundel:** the request in the TAG github that was raised, it would be good to link to this issue. 
+
+> *Manu Sporny:* See [Relevant TAG issue](https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/874).
+
+**Manu Sporny:** It's been reviewed already. 
+… They asked for pointers, we responded. They're asking to schedule time in the f2f in London. 
+
+**Brent Zundel:** Good. Moving on. 
+
+#### 2.2. Security and Privacy Questionnaire (issue vc-bitstring-status-list#77)
+{: #section2-2}
+
+_See github issue [vc-bitstring-status-list#77](https://github.com/w3c/vc-bitstring-status-list/issues/77)._
+
+<!-- issue w3c/vc-bitstring-status-list/77 -->
+
+
+
+**Brent Zundel:** What's the status? 
+… From PING or security? 
+
+**Manu Sporny:** I thought Kyle did a review on this; haven't found the issue. 
+
+**Brent Zundel:** Not seeing issues. 
+
+**Manu Sporny:** Neither am I, perhaps they weren't filed. 
+
+**Brent Zundel:** We need PING and Security requests raised. 
+
+**Manu Sporny:** I'll take an action to do that. 
+
+#### 2.3. Matching of VC issuer and Status List VC issuer - MAY vs MUST (issue vc-bitstring-status-list#124)
+{: #section2-3}
+
+_See github issue [vc-bitstring-status-list#124](https://github.com/w3c/vc-bitstring-status-list/issues/124)._
+
+<!-- issue w3c/vc-bitstring-status-list/124 -->
+
+
+
+**Manu Sporny:** This was a request from dmitriz. They requested clarification from the spec, which is what PR 129 does. As a result, merging will address 124. TallTed has some minor fixups in the PR. 
+
+#### 2.4. Remove `ttl` (issue vc-bitstring-status-list#120)
+{: #section2-4}
+
+_See github issue [vc-bitstring-status-list#120](https://github.com/w3c/vc-bitstring-status-list/issues/120)._
+
+<!-- issue w3c/vc-bitstring-status-list/120 -->
+
+
+
+**Brent Zundel:** PR 128 is associated with this. 
+
+_See github pull request [vc-bitstring-status-list#128](https://github.com/w3c/vc-bitstring-status-list/pull/128)._
+
+<!-- issue w3c/vc-bitstring-status-list/128 -->
+
+
+
+**Manu Sporny:** The PR marks the TTL property as at-risk. Allows us to go to CR. The assertion is that the "ttl" property and the "validUntil" property clash when they are both set. 
+… Seems like the "ttl" property should not exists. 
+… There is disagreement on that. 
+
+**Dave Longley:** There are conflicting semantics and likely layering violations. When would software look at ttl vs validUntil? 
+… Might be that the way TTL is done via HTTP headers instead of mixing it up with the credential data. 
+
+#### 2.5. Add `@type` to `encodedList` term definition (issue vc-bitstring-status-list#125)
+{: #section2-5}
+
+_See github issue [vc-bitstring-status-list#125](https://github.com/w3c/vc-bitstring-status-list/issues/125)._
+
+<!-- issue w3c/vc-bitstring-status-list/125 -->
+
+
+
+**Brent Zundel:** Has PRs, expected to be merged soon. 
+
+**Manu Sporny:** Want to highlight that we want to make possible for systems to compress this data. 
+… Status list might be hundreds of KB, plus bloat of encoding. 
+… This allows reduction by defining a type. This group defined multibase with a u prefix on it. 
+… We changed this from base64 with padding to base64 nopad. 
+
+#### 2.6. "bitstring" vs "bit string" (issue vc-bitstring-status-list#127)
+{: #section2-6}
+
+_See github issue [vc-bitstring-status-list#127](https://github.com/w3c/vc-bitstring-status-list/issues/127)._
+
+<!-- issue w3c/vc-bitstring-status-list/127 -->
+
+
+
+**Brent Zundel:** We have time to talk about this. 
+
+**Manu Sporny:** As pointed by TallTed, there are two ways to refer to what we're explaining: "Bit string" vs "Bitstring". 
+… Both forms are fine. One is more popular. 
+… SEO, typing, and other arguments are weak. 
+… The changes require a lot of work from the editorial standpoint, for not much to gain. 
+
+**Ted Thibodeau Jr.:** Having done some painful research on the PR on this, we started from "Bit String", and it was arbitrarily changed to "Bitstring". 
+… From web searching, both exists. The one word, redirects to the two word. 
+
+> *Dmitri Zagidulin:* if we're the only ones that use 'bitstring'... that's perfect SEO! that's what we want!
+
+**Ted Thibodeau Jr.:** They are usually consistent within a doc. It will be painful, and I grant that it will be painful at some point. 
+… The two word is more correct. 
+
+**Dmitri Zagidulin:** I posit that the one word is a feature, not a bug. 
+
+**Joe Andrieu:** I'm on the fence because I like plain English. But branding wise, bitstring seems better. 
+
+**Manu Sporny:** I don't disagree. 
+… Given I just found out we haven't submitted PING nor privacy, it could be we're sitting in limbo for 3 months. That's enough time to make the change. 
+
+> *Ted Thibodeau Jr.:* as far seo goes, `vc bit string` (note, no quoting, as most web searches go) is going to find them `vc bitstring` and `vc bitstring` is going to find them `vc bit string` .... the thing they really want SEO to work for is Verifiable Credentials, not bit string.
+
+**Manu Sporny:** We just need closure. Either keep, or change it and do it. 
+
+**Brent Zundel:** The question on the table is: do we keep or change? If we change, who does the work? 
+
+**Dave Longley:** While we have the time, implementations are looking for stability. 
+
+**Ted Thibodeau Jr.:** As far as SEO goes, both the one word and two words will show up in the search results; because most people don't put searches in quotes. 
+… They're likely going to put VC right next to the query, and are likely to quickly find what they're looking for. 
+
+**Brent Zundel:** We've spent enough time on this today. 
+… Anything else? 
+
+**Joe Andrieu:** Would it need to be hyphenated when using the two words? 
+
+**Ted Thibodeau Jr.:** Both are nouns, so that could be confusing. Everything I've found treats it as an adjective. 
+… It could be hyphenated, but nothing I've found uses it that way. 
+
+**Brent Zundel:** That's it, thanks all. Looks like we're on track except for the PING & security reviews for bitstring. 
+
+---

assets/minute_processing.json

@@ -1,5 +1,5 @@
 {
- "date": "2024-01-10T17:14:34.859Z",
+ "date": "2024-01-17T07:40:44.898Z",
  "file_names": [
  "2021-06-14-vcwg.md",
  "2021-08-11-vcwg.md",
@@ -143,7 +143,8 @@
  "2023-12-20-vcwg.md",
  "2024-01-03-vcwg.md",
  "2024-01-09-vcwg-special.md",
- "2024-01-10-vcwg.md"
+ "2024-01-10-vcwg.md",
+ "2024-01-16-vcwg-special.md"
  ],
  "resolutions": [
  {

assets/nicknames.json

@@ -1278,7 +1278,8 @@
  },
  {
  "nick": [
- "Wesley"
+ "Wesley",
+ "Wes-smith"
  ],
  "name": "Wesley Smith"
  }