Add confidenceMethod to table of reserved terms and v2 @context
#1142
Conversation
OR13
requested review from
msporny,
selfissued,
decentralgabe and
awoie
as code owners
|
I am requesting changes on my own PR, until the links are not 404. |
index.html
Outdated
| implementations are demonstrated by the end of the Candidate Recommendation | ||
| Phase. If that does not occur, this reservation will remain, but the existing | ||
| section in the specification will be removed. | ||
| See <a href="https://w3c-ccg.github.io/vc-confidence-method/">Verifiable Credential Confidence Methods</a>. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@awoie this link is still 404
There was a problem hiding this comment.
https://w3c-ccg.github.io/vc-confidence-method/ is still 404
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| "confidenceMethod": { | ||
| "@id": "https://www.w3.org/2018/credentials#confidenceMethod", | ||
| "@type": "@id" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Shouldn't this be scoped to credentialSubject?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It should either be globally scoped or use "@propagate": true, but, yes, making it a property on a VC only isn't correct.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I believe confidenceMethod could be scoped to any property/ies. I don't understand what it would do for credentialSubject, nor what it does for VerifiableCredential.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Based on the comments above, I don't think it should be scoped... However, if it should be scoped, there should be normative statements that people can read, before the context scoping is applied... and some human readable summary of why, here:
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Maybe https://w3id.org/security#confidenceMethod would be a better term definition, if the W3C CCG will define the behavior.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
By "scoped to any property/ies" above, I meant that this confidenceMethod should be applicable to any property+value pair (or group of same), something like
_:property
[ _:value 12345 ;
confidenceMethod `{uri to method used to get or usable to test value}`
]
|
The issue was discussed in a meeting on 2023-06-14
View the transcript1.2. Update reservation table #1142 (pr vc-data-model#1142)See github pull request vc-data-model#1142. Orie Steele: 1142 reserves the confidenceMethod in the JSON-LD Context and adds the confidence method as a JSON member and adds same at-risk reservation dependency. I added a link that we expect to not be 404. Under render, I attempted to link to document that is furthest along wrt. renderMethod. Not transferred to CCG yet. This one adds links and at risk ffeature can read specs. See github pull request vc-data-model#1140. Manu Sporny: What's 1140 about? Orie Steele: Pull 1141 adds an issue marker about debating this particular property and whether we will reserve these things in the core context. This is saying same thing as reserved properties, focuses on property in core context. If we merge other PR, then this issue marker would still remain and at some point confidenceMethod could be removed. That would be the reason to leave issue marker in... never anything documented for this extension point. |
|
This PR is currently blocked because the links to the CCG specifications do not resolve. In order to fix the links:
|
^ this is still blocking the PR. |
I'll propose this as a work item in the W3C CCG. Give me time until the end of this week. |
|
@awoie any update? |
I proposed a new CCG work item here: w3c-ccg/community#245. Update: ... and here https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-credentials/2023Jun/0170.html |
|
@OR13 -- |
|
The issue was discussed in a meeting on 2023-06-27
View the transcript2. Update reservation table (pr vc-data-model#1142)See github pull request vc-data-model#1142. Brent Zundel: 1142 updates the reservation table with confirmation method and render method. Render method's URLs work. confirmation URL dont work yet.
Brent Zundel: as soon as that is officially adopted in the CCG the URLs will work and I will approve. Kristina Yasuda: Is there a timeline for that?
Oliver Terbu: We just created the new work item proposal today. others can give more details on timeline.
Michael Prorock: Harrison is chairing the meeting today and will note. Send a message to the chairs and we can expedite it. If you have multiple parties and there are no objections, it will go through. Kristina Yasuda: If you want to follow the confidence method work, pay attention to the CCG. Oliver Terbu: We are still looking for owners of the work item. Kristina Yasuda: if you are interested in moving this forward,contact the CCG or reach out to oliver. Orie Steele: Confused. I though spruce and digital bazaar are sponsoring this work? Oliver Terbu: We don't have the bandwidth to own the work. Didn't say we would not implement. Kristina Yasuda: lets take these questions offline.
Manu Sporny: Digital bazaar is supportive of the work, but currently we don't have the bandwidth to be an owner of the work. We see value in it. cant work on it for 6 mo or so. Kristina Yasuda: Any coordinate needed with CCG?
Michael Prorock: If there is no one working on it, can we drop it from the VCWG side? On the CCG side we need two owners from different orgs to approve. Kristina Yasuda: Lets wait and see. |
|
So far, nobody has stepped forward to work on I suggest we remove the registration request unless that changes. |
OR13
changed the title
@context
|
The issue was discussed in a meeting on 2023-07-05
View the transcript1.1. Add confidenceMethod to table of reserved terms and v2
|
|
The work item was proposed but the work item was not adopted yet. But let's give this two more weeks before closing this PR. There are a few people who are interested in driving this work item in CCG but no final commitment yet. |
|
The issue was discussed in a meeting on 2023-07-11
View the transcript1.3. Add confidenceMethod to table of reserved terms and v2
|
Update: there are now three owners in CCG. |
|
Three owners have been found now: w3c-ccg/community#245 |
|
The issue was discussed in a meeting on 2023-07-11
View the transcript1.3. Add confidenceMethod to table of reserved terms and v2
|
Excellent. Once the URLs resolve properly, I believe we can move forward with this PR. |
@mprorock, @man4prez, @kwlinson -- Can you please provide a final determination on whether or not the Confidence Method Extension specification has been adopted by CCG? It has met all of the work item adoption criteria, AFAICT. That determination is blocking this PR in VCWG. |
|
The issue was discussed in a meeting on 2023-07-25
View the transcript1.1. Add confidenceMethod to table of reserved terms and v2
|
|
The issue was discussed in a meeting on 2023-07-26
View the transcript1.1. Add confidenceMethod to table of reserved terms and v2
|
|
The work item has been approved at this point: w3c-ccg/community#245 (comment) We are waiting for the repo to be moved to CCG, so the URLs resolve, so we can merge this PR. |
|
The issue was discussed in a meeting on 2023-08-01
View the transcript1.3. Add confidenceMethod to table of reserved terms and v2
|
Co-authored-by: Ted Thibodeau Jr <[email protected]>
|
Multiple positive review, open for more than a week. Changes requested and made. Merging. |
| might rely on in order to authenticate the holder of a presentation. | ||
| might use to increase their confidence that the value of an attribute in or of | ||
| a verifiable credential or verifiable presentation is accurate, including but not | ||
| limited to attributes such `initialRecipient` (a/k/a `issuee`), `presenter`, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I know I missed the merge. You can probably fix this with a direct commit, rather than going through all the PR hoops...
| limited to attributes such `initialRecipient` (a/k/a `issuee`), `presenter`, | |
| limited to attributes such as `initialRecipient` (a/k/a `issuee`), `presenter`, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks for catching this. Fixed in cf429b1
Preview | Diff