• 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.

• 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.

  • • https://lists.trustoverip.org/g/technology-stack-wg-2

      Scroll to the Bottom
      Click Green Button to log-in to the mailing list
      Then Click Blue Button to +Join the list

• New Members: 

• Current work

  • Spec repo is here https://github.com/trustoverip/tswg-did-method-webs-specification
    • Registered in the did registry here https://w3c.github.io/did-spec-registries/#did-methods
  • Reference implementation is here https://github.com/hyperledger-labs/did-webs-resolver

We discussed how the tree of possibilities in KERI can't cloud the simplest steps. And so the spec needs to be very clear about what is optional/additional and needs to logically build in a way that makes it obvious to the reader where they can stop for their use case.

Catchup on final changes status:

• What needs to be completed to enter the public review process?
  • All public review changes should be well documented so that they can watch the process
    • Normative vs Informative information in the spec is important prior to release https://github.com/trustoverip/tswg-did-method-webs-specification/issues/120
      • Work backwards from the normative statements. Triage informative to minimum.
        • If you start with these bones it's easier to hang all of the minimal informative information and move everything else outside of the spec.
      • Informative that isn't needed in the spec
        • Appendix
        • Implementation guide
        • Explain why in a separate paper

Breakdown by section:

See the ToIP template, might have ISO influence

• Normative
  • Core Characteristics - 'This section is normative' (see examples in other specs)
    • Method Name
      • 'webs' SHOULD is a normative but for an informative
    • Method-Specific  Identifer ABNF is Normative, see DID core spec
      
      • KERI AID paragraph contains informative statements, which is the opposite of the previous Normative section. Good 
        • Should some of those statement be Normative?
        • And if they are altered to be Normative, should it be referencing the normative info in the KERI s pecs?
  • Breakdown normative into addressable numbered sections that provide the rules to build from.
  • You cannot include a non-Normative reference in W3C
    • if SCID has to be AID, then AID must be normative.... so perhaps specify a SCID... bare minimum is preferred.
• Informative
  • Abstract (shouldn't be numbered)... it is simply informative
  • Introduction
    • This is a specific section currently, but probably should become all of the informative information at the front of the spec
  • Requirements, Notation, and Conventions
  • Informative inside normative should be boxed... but only if it helps devs etc make a decision
  • Use examples at the start of these informative sections
• Todos and missing information sections need to be addressed today
  • Milestone for 1.0 https://github.com/trustoverip/tswg-did-method-webs-specification/milestone/2
• Reivew current state of hyperledger-labs did:webs reference implementation https://github.com/hyperledger-labs/did-webs-resolver 
• Open PRs and Issues
  • https://github.com/trustoverip/tswg-did-method-webs-specification/issues
  • https://github.com/trustoverip/tswg-did-method-webs-specification/pulls

•  Lance Byrd will follow up with Sam about IANA registration and document it for us