Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Add ECDSA secpr1 cryptosuite to VCWG input documents. #63

Closed
wants to merge 3 commits into from
Closed
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension

Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
7 changes: 5 additions & 2 deletions index.html
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -219,8 +219,10 @@ <h3>
signatures or proofs of existence, for bounded documents, such as verifiable
credentials. Concrete serializations will be provided based on <a
href="https://w3c.github.io/vc-data-model/#json-web-token">VC-JWT</a>, the <a
href="https://w3c-ccg.github.io/lds-ed25519-2020/">Ed25519 Cryptosuite</a>, and
the <a href="https://w3c-ccg.github.io/lds-ecdsa-secp256k1-2019/">Secp256k1
href="https://w3c-ccg.github.io/lds-ed25519-2020/">Ed25519 Cryptosuite</a>,
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

AFAIK the charter can in fact refer to work items anywhere on the internet... not just in the W3C CCG.

Copy link
Member Author

@msporny msporny Jan 31, 2022

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I expect W3C AC Members to raise IPR concerns if they see that a draft is being pulled in (for a normative work item) from a location that they are not familiar with. Specifically, if the IPR for any work item isn't clear (using language that has been agreed to by W3C Members), there is a strong chance that one or more AC Representatives will take issue with it (e.g., as a stall tactic), even to the point of raising a formal objection. In the very best case, they're going to ask the document author to track down everyone that contributed to that document and sign an IPR release for the draft before it can be pulled into the WG. This IPR uncertainty when W3C AC Members review our charter is all stuff that we should avoid as much as possible... it'll unnecessarily slow the work down.

W3C AC Reps understand W3C Community Group specification -> W3C Working Group specification. They raise their eyebrows at most anything else. We should avoid giving them targets to shoot at.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Being allowed to do something, and having it be a good idea are not the same thing.

I don't think the W3C CCG is somehow "better" than other places when it comes to links related to "Verifiable Credentials"... and I am not sure the AC Members would agree with your assertions, but your clarity does help.

the <a href="https://w3c-ccg.github.io/di-ecdsa-secpr1-2019/">Secpr1
Cryptosuite</a>, and the
<a href="https://w3c-ccg.github.io/lds-ecdsa-secp256k1-2019/">Secp256k1
Cryptosuite</a>. Concrete serializations based on the <a
href="https://w3c-ccg.github.io/ldp-bbs2020/">BBS+ Cryptosuite</a> might be provided, if an <a
href="https://identity.foundation/bbs-signature/">IETF BBS+ RFC</a> is published
Expand All @@ -236,6 +238,7 @@ <h3>
<a href="https://w3c-ccg.github.io/data-integrity-spec/">Data Integrity</a>,
<a href="https://w3c.github.io/vc-data-model/#json-web-token">VC-JWT</a>,
<a href="https://w3c-ccg.github.io/lds-ed25519-2020/">Ed25519 Cryptosuite</a>,
<a href="https://w3c-ccg.github.io/di-ecdsa-secpr1-2019/">Secpr1 Cryptosuite</a>,
<a href="https://w3c-ccg.github.io/lds-ecdsa-secp256k1-2019/">Secp256k1 Cryptosuite</a>,
<a href="https://w3c-ccg.github.io/ldp-bbs2020/">BBS+ Cryptosuite</a>
<p class="milestone"><b>Expected completion:</b> Q4 2023</p>
Expand Down