| 55 mins | General agenda updates from issuance protocol progress |
| - Review updates to tables (Sankarshan’s and Mathieu’s)
- Discuss any feedback from stakeholders
- Review ToIP CEPTF Blog Post, and discuss IIW goals
- Hakan
- Synced with Vlad - worked on OpenID4VCI document, finalised it.
- Next action item is to contact Torsten and have him review the document
- Asked Accenture colleagues for feedback - awaiting feedback before next meeting
- Vlad: suggested to put more information related to architecture - Vlad can comment more ont his next meeting
- Realized that comparing protocols is like comparing apples and oranges
- Issue credential v2 is very compact and simple, yet tons of dependencies on DIDComm, Problem Report, etc.
- OpenID4VCI is less compact, but dependencies are handled within boundaries of spec
- Having more information on architecture model would be perhaps more helpful to help readers understand expectations
- If group is ok with above notes, the suggestion is to incorporate the architecture updates in the evaluation document for presentation protocols - which would then allow us to compare issuance doc vs presentation doc to see whether or not the changes add value
- Mathieu
- Update from contributors on ongoing 4 issuance documents
- Experience of filling it out (ISO and OpenID)
- ISO 23330-3 (feedback from Subhasis)
- Lots of items still in draft
- Lots of references between -3 and -1
- Looking for peer review to ensure proper documentation
- Too many options in the ISO specs, struggled to document a bit due to multiple options
- Sankarshan: noticed opportunity to link back documents to ToIP Glossary to ensure alignment
- Drummond: Shared the ToIP Glossary Workspace
- Important to also ensure alignment between various communities (e.g., OWF)
- Let group know that the 'terminology engine', in collaboration with TNO will be ready this fall
- Vlad: reviewed Hakan's comments and felt that some information didn't have a proper criteria to place it
- Subhasis: feels that having peer reviews (architect of technical PO) is the only way to improve documentation and ensure we're providing value to end consumers of docs
- Review Sankarshan's document:
- Suggestion to place the protocols in columns, and criteria in rows for better comparison
- Hakan: worked on OpenID4VCI Document, will have it reviewed by Torsten and/or other protocol experts to review
- Subhasis: reach out to Andrew Hughes to ask for peer review
- Statuses of v1 issuance protocols documents
- OIDC4VCI: 70%
- ISO 23220-3: 90%
- ACDC: 70%
- Issue Cred v2: 90%
- Discuss idea of peer reviewing of each other's documents
- Update on ToIP Blog post & IIW (Oct 10-12)
|
