Info
See ToIP calendar for cancellations, etc.
did:webs Task Force
10:00 – 11:00am ET
Weekly on Friday, until Dec 22, 2024
Location:
https://zoom.us/j/92492310278?pwd=Um1uSWljTkRoQjdwaG52WHlsZmNXZz09
Meeting Recording Link
Posted after the meeting:
Video Recording
Audio recording
Attendees
Lance Byrd
Kent Bull
Charles Lanahan
Ed Eykholt
Henk van Cann
Agenda Items and Notes (including all relevant links)
Time | Agenda Item | Lead | Notes |
5 min | - Start recording
- Welcome & antitrust notice
- Introduction of new members
- Agenda review
| Chairs | |
5 mins | Review of action items from previous meeting | Chairs | |
5 mins | Announcements | TF Leads | Tech stack WG has a new mailing list for the new charter. This is part of the acceptance of the new IP, etc. Open Web Foundation licensing. |
5 mins | Reports | Open | |
25 mins | Discussion | Open | Catchup on final changes status: - Diagraming in ToIP
- An index of diagrams would help
- a markdown table that provides metadata/context that allows for the community to determine the usefulness/reputation of the diagram.
- Lets start with KERISSE (at least for KERI related diagrams?). Perhaps this will expand to the wider ToIP ecosystem.
- Broken links checker is automated and will help us maintain.
- Medium articles can be scraped as well.
- Diagrams should be close to their origin (ie. in the repo it applies to) but linking can lead to drill-down, discovery, and more
- Discussions on the diagram occur within the repo. It may prompt discussion at a higher level (repo), etc.
- Needs to be very dynamic, PRs etc. will result in updates, removal, etc.
- Some are informational, some map a spec, some are future ideas, etc.
- A decentralized model is necessary in order to maintain what diagrams are important, useful, out-of-date
- Implementors draft, to get multiple implementations to verify the steps
- Quality check on the spec
- Should be able to show interop between implementations
- This allows us to enter 'final' public review
- This should be socialized that more implementations are needed as a next step that we would like to help support
- Separating the admin control from did:web, to provide separate signing control is a big step.
- Wording this in a way that helps those outside our community to understand/appreciate that step is extremely valuable.
- What needs to be completed to enter the public review process?
|
5 mins | Any other business | Open | |
5 mins | - Review decisions/action items
- Planning for next meeting
| Chairs | - Lance Byrd will update the spec version and add a section asking for additional reference implementations to exercise and improve the spec and to show interop with our python hyperledger-labs reference impl
- Lance Byrd will cleanup co-chair lists
- Lance Byrd will define the minimal interoperability profile for did:webs spec.... then we can define additional profiles that include the optional/nice-to-have features like
whois . - Take a look at Ed's diagram https://github.com/trustoverip/tswg-acdc-specification/issues/77 to discuss (quickly) next week.
- Henk van Cann and Kor Dwarshuis will work on the KERISSE-engine maintained diagrams & images list:
1. metadata table pointing to (URLs) - and describing images and diagrams with addition options (reputation, level, status, etc.) 2. a search option in KERISSE with only images, based on a scrape-function Kor has already written: getTextAroundImage 3. the broken link checker reports every Monday that the images are still out there
|