Time

Agenda Item

Lead

Notes

5 min

• Start recording

• Welcome & antitrust notice

• Introduction of new members

• Agenda review

Chairs

• Antitrust Policy Notice: Attendees are reminded to adhere to the meeting agenda and not participate in activities prohibited under antitrust and competition laws. Only members of ToIP who have signed the necessary agreements are permitted to participate in this activity beyond an observer role.

• New Members:

  • @Richard Esplin: Not new, but now attending this meeting, would like to chat about the Interop Task Force

15 min

Task Force updates

TF Leads

• ACDC

  • Has begun work on the spec

  • Created their own terms wiki because there is some specialized terminology - an example is "SAID" (Self-Addressing Identifier)

  • The spec has a complete example of chained credentials

  • ACDC defines semantics about credential chaining that are not defined by the W3C VC spec

  • The credential format does not use JSON-LD, but uses plain JSON. Schemas are defined using JSON Schema. Credentials all use SAIDs so that clients can verify cryptographically that the credential is identical to what was issued and the schema is identical to what the credential was issued against.

• Interop

  • @Richard Esplin reported that the interop effort was always defined to support multiple TIPs (ToIP Interoperability Profiles). The one that motivated the start of this TF was the Saturn V TIP, but there were several others proposed.

  • In the past year, the Saturn V TIP was pretty much completed. Six vendors support it (not all have not all been submitted.)

  • Now the question is: what's next? What's next for the Saturn V TIP itself? What other TIPs are needed/in-development.

  • But it's unclear how to proceed. There is no primary convener since @Dan Gisolfi had to step down. Richard has tried to help but cannot take on another lead position.

  • Meeting attendance has been between 2 and 5 people each Friday.

  • @Drummond Reed reported that the discussion two weeks ago was about shifting the focus from TIPs to focusing on the definition of the ToIP stack.

  • @Daniel Bachenheimer Unless we have another focal point—such as the Good Health Pass—this Task Force might not have enough focus.

  • @Kaliya Young said that there are several aspects of the GHP work that need completion in order for implementation and testing. WACI Pex is one area; BBS+ is another. The sooner we can get to a community test suite, the better. There can also be an opportunity to collaborate with the DIF Interop Working Group (currently Kaliya, David Waite (PING), and Snorre (Dwaila)). This week that meeting is at 2PM PT this coming Wednesday.

  • @Kaliya Young is concerned about the rejection of JSON-LD with BBS+, but that we need to ship working solutions.

  • Proposed next step:  @Daniel Bachenheimer and @Richard Esplin to be invited to attend the next DIF Interop WG meeting.

• ToIP Technical Architecture

  • (Drummond to add more notes)

  • @Steve McCown made the point that readers often have the question, "Where do I go for working code? What library to I install to do _________?" 

  • @Drummond Reed acknowledged Steve's question and said it would be very important to answer that question with a pointer in the high-level documents. So the docs should be part of a clear hierarchy of general-to-specific.

5 min

Four-Layer Explainer & ToIP Governance Architecture — Should they be combined?

@Drummond Reed

• The Four-Layer Explainer has been proposed as a document to help explain the architecture of the ToIP stack. 

• Unfortunately none of the contributors to that document (led by Darrell) were on today's call.

• @Drummond Reed suggested that the content of that proposed document appear to overlap heavily with the ToIP Technical Architecture specification, so do we really need two different documents.

• ACTION: @Drummond Reed to follow up and discuss the Four-Layer Explainer and the ToIP Technical Architecture TSS with @Darrell O'Donnell.

• We also discuss the associated ToIP web content (we are using Workflowy to capture proposed text here: https://workflowy.com/s/toip-website/rYSxTp5UUvy74ITT)

25 mins

Review of Design Principles for the ToIP Stack draft

@Drummond Reed

• See this Google doc: Design Principles for the ToIP Stack

• @Drummond Reed explained the purpose of the doc and the community workshop process.

• @Vikas Malhotra said he would like to participate in the process and asked if we were open to additional principles. Drummond said yes.

• @Kaliya Young asked about the hourglass principle and whether the TSWG had made a specific choice for the protocol at the "narrow waist" of the hourglass.

• @Drummond Reed said that, even though early ToIP documents and diagrams referred to DIDComm as that protocol, no official choice has been made yet. That in fact is one of the reasons to complete and approve the Design Principles for the ToIP Stack document so that it can be used to guide the work of both the TSWG and all ToIP WGs in defining, building out, and hardening the ToIP stack.

5 mins

Any other business

All

None.

5 mins

• Review decisions/action items

• Planning for next meeting 

Chairs