[wg/did] Charter proposal: rechartering the Decentralized Identifier WG

[pchampin]

New charter proposal, reviewers please take note.

Charter Review

Charter: https://w3c.github.io/did-wg-charter/

What kind of charter is this? Check the relevant box / remove irrelevant branches.

• Existing WG recharter

• current charter at https://w3c.github.io/did-wg-charter/

Horizontal Reviews: apply the Github label "Horizontal review requested" to request reviews for accessibility (a11y), internationalization (i18n), privacy, and security. Also add a "card" for this issue to the Strategy Funnel.

Communities suggested for outreach:

• Credentials CG

Known or potential areas of concern:

• there is dissent in the current WG about the content of this charter proposal, which is explicitly documented in the introduction of the charter.

Where would charter proponents like to see issues raised? (this strategy funnel issue, a different github repo, email, ...)

• https://github.com/w3c/did-wg-charter/issues

Anything else we should think about as we review?

[pchampin]

@brentzundel

[himorin]

memo for HR groups
current running charter: https://www.w3.org/2020/12/did-wg-charter.html
diff: https://services.w3.org/htmldiff?doc1=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.w3.org%2F2020%2F12%2Fdid-wg-charter.html&doc2=https%3A%2F%2Fw3c.github.io%2Fdid-wg-charter%2F

[pchampin]

The following paragraph is currently in the charter, but @plh suggested that it should rather be (1) removed from the charter and (2) included in the email to the AC announcing the proposed charter:

We note that including the option to standardize DID Methods within the scope of this charter was controversial within the existing DID WG. There was dissent in how best to address the director's advice prior to the publication of Decentralized Identifiers (DIDs) v1.0 as a Recommendation, which was to address and deliver proposed standard DID Method(s) and demonstrate interoperable implementations during its next chartered period.

[himorin]

No comment nor request from i18n

[matatk]

I'm writing on behalf of the Accessible Platform Architectures (APA) WG. We have a question: one of our aspirations is to help the industry move away from CAPTCHAs, as they pose significant accessibility barriers (our document there proposes some alternatives, as well as describing the problems).

We got the impression that a W3C group may be working towards replacing CAPTCHAs. Would that involve your group? If so, we'd love to see it mentioned in the charter. If not, we're happy to sign off on your charter.

[brentzundel]

@matatk Though DIDs may be useful in some designs for replacing CAPTCHAs, I expect Verifiable Credentials to play a much more important role.

[matatk]

Thanks @brentzundel, that makes sense. We have a long-running thread with Verifiable Credentials, so will pick it up.

Meanwhile, I re-confirm that we're happy to sign off on your charter. @ruoxiran explained how I can do that by adjusting the labels, so I'll do that now.

[plehegar]

update: the Team is looking into a potential concern

[brentzundel]

I'm happy to meet with the team to discuss

[plehegar]

update: the Team is looking to gather more information from the DiD Working Group.

[plehegar]

The latest attempt at resolving the formal objections failed. We started with 4 formal objections, resolved 2, and received an additional objection yesterday.

A Council will need to look at the remaining formal objections.

[samuelweiler]

As background, charter sent for AC review on 7 August 2023 (public)
Call for AC review. (member-only)
Charter snapshot (public)
Results (member-only)

Three public formal objections
1
2
3

[brentzundel]

It is my understanding that #2 from the list provided by Sam has been resolved.

…

On Fri, Dec 15, 2023 at 8:02 AM Samuel Weiler ***@***.***> wrote: As background, charter sent for AC review on 7 August 2023 <https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-new-work/2023Aug/0002.html> (public) Call for AC review <https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-ac-members/2023JulSep/0016.html>. (member-only) Charter snapshot <https://www.w3.org/2023/07/did-wg-charter.html> (public) Results <https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/33280/did-wg-2023/results> (member-only) Three public formal objections 1 <https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-new-work/2023Sep/0011.html> 2 <https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-new-work/2023Aug/0015.html> 3 <https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-new-work/2023Sep/0008.html> — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#376 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ACPFKP6762NLWAXEWEL4MYLYJRQ7ZAVCNFSM6AAAAAAV7M4CZOVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMYTQNJYGAZDEMBRG4> . You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID: ***@***.***>

[plehegar]

1. @pchampin is going to write a report for the W3C Council summarizing the decision and the objection.
2. @ylafon is the Council Team Contact to support the Council

For details, see referral to W3C Council.

[mnot]

@plehegar I can't tell from that link -- will there be an announcement of the report, and will there be an opportunity for input to the council by the AC and/or public?

[plehegar]

@mnot Whether a Council welcomes or not information from the public is up to each Council. The Team Contact for each Council should make a Council aware when they receive information. As mentioned above, @ylafon is the Team Contact for the DiD Council.

[ylafon]

Note that the Team Report, if it can be shared, is added to the Formal Objection Dashboard this is the place to track Formal Objections status.
The Council report is announced when the Council concludes.

[mnot]

Thanks @ylafon. That dashboard is very hard to find unless you're 'in the know' -- perhaps it could be linked from https://www.w3.org/Member (although that page is already very crowded and hard to navigate)?

[plehegar]

Thanks @ylafon. That dashboard is very hard to find unless you're 'in the know' -- perhaps it could be linked from https://www.w3.org/Member (although that page is already very crowded and hard to navigate)?

@koalie ^

[plehegar]

Council requested clarification and a 28 days review period. Deadline is 12 April 2024.

Latest proposed charter.

[koalie]

That dashboard is very hard to find unless you're 'in the know' -- perhaps it could be linked from https://www.w3.org/Member (although that page is already very crowded and hard to navigate)?

Hi @mnot I added a link to the formal objection dashboard in the right-hand side menu of the Member homepage.

[mnot]

Thank you @koalie!

[plehegar]

The latest proposed charter did not receive formal objections and the Council was dissolved.

[cwilso]

Note this should be "did not receive Formal Objections".

[himorin]

quite minor points (per recent template change)

• remove performance from 5. Coordination 1st paragraph
• last at 6. Participation, Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct has been renamed as Code of Conduct
• 4th paragraph in 8. Decision Policy, remove director from the last at the discretion of the Chairs or the Director.

[pchampin]

The council approved the creation of the WG, and the call for participation was sent: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-ac-members/2024AprJun/0016.html

[plehegar]

Approved
https://www.w3.org/2024/04/did-wg-charter.html