 So good morning, good evening, good afternoon, good middle of the night, whatever it is, wherever you are, where's my agenda, there it is. So we have our usual reminders, Todd will go over for the call for papers for the forum and that's yesterday, but maybe we can still submit. Hackfest planning. July. July, not June. Oh, I'm sorry, it is July, you're right, and it's not July. Then we have some updates from Quilt and Identity. Do we have people on for those? Maybe. I'm on Chris, it's Vipin. Thanks Vipin. All right, so do we have anyone from the Quilt team? Sorry, I didn't hear you. Can I just repeat the question? I'm asking if there's somebody on from the Quilt team to do the update. I'm not sure who's. It doesn't look like anything got updated into the Wiki either yesterday, so unfortunately. All right, and I can't click the link here. So okay, so then we have Identity and then I just have here as a placeholder the copyright discussion, which is held up because people are on PTO or traveling, so we'll just hold that as a placeholder. Any other items for today's agenda? Okay, if not, then Todd, do you want to? Yep, so just a couple of quick things. Reminder Hyperledge Global Forum, which is the end of this year, December in Basel. We have the call for papers open for that right now. That will close about a month from now, July 13th. We'd love to see a lot of technical content in there from the folks on this call and the broader community. Please get abstract submitted. The Amsterdam HackFest is in about two weeks from now. We have a lot of people registered for this. The training day is full up. The HackFest is also, we've got well over 100 people registered for that. Fantastic to see the interest. The one thing I will say there, and I'm dropping the link into the chat window, the Rocket Chat TSC channel, is we have the draft agenda. I've noticed people have started mapping sessions to actual times on that Thursday and Friday, please continue to do so. There's a lot of good agenda items and topics suggested lower in the document, but I think we want to start getting those mapped out in advance so people can hit the ground running as soon as they get there. Otherwise, it's looking good. And then the final thing is just related to the final HackFest for the year. We'll be in Montreal October 3rd to 4th, and registration is open for that. And that's tagged on to the members of it. Yeah, hopefully lots of people will be there. Okay, excellent. So we don't have anybody from Quilt, so VIPIN you're up. Can you hear me now? I can hear you just fine. Okay, great. It doesn't mean anybody else can, but... Well, that is a indicator, right, Chris? Anyway, so Todd should have the link in the agenda. So if I just don't want to go and read what is there, but basically if you have taken a look and if you have any comments, please get back to me, but I can just quickly go over exactly what is there in the list, I mean in the document here. So we have a pretty healthy attendance. Every two weeks we hold the audio conferences. There has been some requests sporadic to change it so that people from other parts of the world can take part. This seems to be a continuing request in other working groups that I have attended, it becomes a challenge because obviously there will be somebody who's inconvenienced no matter when you hold it. But the suggestion yesterday was to move it up by an hour, which means 11 o'clock on Wednesday, so that makes it easier for people from China to participate because it won't be midnight to one o'clock, but it will be somewhere like 11 o'clock, a little kinder hour, but it also means that the west coast will be affected a little bit because again it will be at 8 o'clock instead of 9 o'clock. So in terms of the work products, I mean in terms of the attendance, we already have people, it is a very popular working group, a lot of people turn up with new participants, you know, maybe one or two every call, and the diversity is astonishing because of the fact that people from all different professions or in walks of life seem to find identity a compelling topic. So we have things like people from governments, the legal profession and students, which in addition to of course the usual suspects from the technical companies, DLT companies and others. Overall activity, we have regular cadence, we have not skipped a single meeting, and the paperwork is, the work on the paper is challenging to say the least because again the topic is vast, we are trying to get our hands around it, but I don't know who somebody needs to go on mute, it looks like it sounds very... Anyway, so the work on the paper is proceeding, we have come up with a way to volunteer and work on the paper together. And a lot of material has been contributed and we need to make it, you know, draft quality. I hope to do that by the end of this particular quarter. The other items are that the paper itself needs to be split into two parts is the general consensus, one is, you know, there will be a general paper on identity matters as it relates to blockchain and hyperlegia, DLT in particular, and then there will be technical section that will deal specifically with identity as a conduit for interoperability, identity as a pivot for interoperability, which has been the case since the beginning, but we will make that into a separate section in the paper or a separate paper. That might mean that we might have another call, much like the architecture working group has a call for security and confidentiality in a staggered cadence, which means if the weeks in which the architecture working group meets, they won't have the call, but on the other week when the identity meets, they'll have the call on Friday. So this is the general gist of, you know, what's in the document of the report. Two requests, one is we need more experts from the DLT platforms on identity to show up and contribute, which obviously was asked in the last session also, but we don't see that contribution, but we do see contribution of people from other organizations, other parts like EEA, people who are associated with Ethereum, people who are associated with other organizations showing up and talking about making this a standard that is applicable not just inside Hyperledger, but in a broader context. Of course, we get people from all the other identity-related groups like DIF, like IIW, like Rebooting Web of Trust and others and verifiable claims working group in W3C because we have people from Indie who are and others sovereign and others who are interested in these topics and they do show up in the identity call and talk about what's happening under the rubric of digital identity elsewhere. So I await further comments from the TSE and we just want to get on with the work of creating the paper and getting a draft together. Okay, but VPIN, so given everything you just said, are you confident you can actually get that done? Yes, I am confident that we can get that done, but identity is a huge topic, so how comprehensive will the output be depends on the breadth of the participation. Yeah, but on that front, I would highly recommend looking at what the architecture working group did, which I think was brilliant, not to try to grok everything at once, but instead try to splice the problem into several PCs that are more manageable. Yeah, sure. I am actually a participant in the architecture working group and very familiar with how we broke it up and so on. So that is a good suggestion and that is why we want to break it up into those two sections so that we can have a more manageable output stream. Well, so I would agree with that and then the other thing that caught my attention was you mentioned the word standard and I think, you know, Brian and company have been trying to make it pretty clear that we are doing development of code here, not standards and so the W3C and F and potentially EAA and so forth are the ones that are focusing a little bit more on standards. I do think that it is, so I guess the question I have is really, you know, is it the intention of the working group that they're creating a standard or are they really just sort of highlighting these exist and these are the ones that we've decided to try to, to organize ourselves around as a coherent means of approaching identity because, you know, there's differing approaches and so I think, you know, understanding of that and then trying to sort of align with the thinking of the various platforms as to how they can interoperably exchange identity because I think, again, you know, when people, I get every day, I hear about quote, unquote interoperability which I think is a bunch of mumbo jumbo and you're talking about from one DLT platform to another unless you have interoperable data standards that you're adhering to but identity is going to be the key thing of being able to sort of provide some sort of a bridge between platforms to carry identity across and again, that is going to require standards but I hope it's not the intention that we're the ones setting them. We are not the ones setting them but if we are going to develop an interface which is a second part of the charter that interface between the different DLTs under Hyperledger because they are so varied and kind of reflect the macrocosm of DLTs we have everything from indie which is specifically focused on identity to fabric, sawtooth, which is similar to some of the, you know, in the scope and of course we have borough we have other platforms there, Quilt and so on so we are singularly poised to influence the standards maybe not set them but we have a way to if we develop that technical document about a generic interface then that will inform the standard because standards are often an interplay of somebody doing something normative and somebody saying, you know, is it practical, is it doable which I presume will come through things like indie so we don't have, you know, any grand designs on that front we want to be very practical in terms of the creation of an interface but we do need participation from the various DLTs under Hyperledger especially the identity folks to come together the most common participants are from indie and from, you know, through extension from sovereign but I don't see anybody from fabric, for example or, you know, or even sawtooth so if we want to ever write some kind of interface then we need those kind of participants as well so I encourage people from those walks from those DLT platforms to participate and give suggestions, you know I know you're right that, you know, splitting it up may be a good thing but in fact in the architecture working group there is another group that is going to take on the identity issue but it is presumably about node identities or system identities but then, you know, where does that end and where does the identity of the trans actors begin that is, you know, up to interpretation so I do participate in those in the architecture working group so hopefully I'll be able to take some of that learnings into the identity working group anything else or any directive from the TSC as to what else can be done or changed to make us more productive so I'll just, you know, the one piece of suggestion that I might add to your problem of finding the right time for the call that doesn't disadvantage our colleagues in Asia is something that I've done in the W3C and OASIS when I've chaired working groups and that is to alternate the time of the call to make it disadvantageous to everybody at some point in time and so, you know, you might alternate it between you know, early morning to early evening, for instance and then, you know, on an alternate, you know, monthly or bi-weekly, you know, time scale you know, you may be on a call at 8 in the evening maybe on the call at 8 in the morning or 9 or whatever but that's really the only way to get any kind of fairness or you might alternate at 8-hour shifts, right? but an hour, making it 11 o'clock is supposed to be midnight isn't necessarily giving anybody No, but that was a suggestion from a person from China it's not like I came up with that myself It's not, I didn't make that one up but you know, that person said look, you know, make it 11 o'clock in the morning would help us so even that minor adjustment could draw in some more interest so what do you think of that? Well, if that satisfies it, that's fine again, it depends on the population Any other thoughts for Victor? No, I mean, the only thing, practically speaking it seems like I understand this can be easily overwhelming and you know, you talked about splitting in two pieces maybe you need to be even more nimble and split further, I don't know I was quite impressed by the way the architecture working group which you're familiar with, I understand is managed to split it in pretty small pieces they could tackle in a fairly reasonable amount of time which of course is much more exciting for everybody and will attract more people then now we are like more than two years in the identity working group was created from the get go and there is not really anything to show and I can imagine it's hard to attract people and get people really motivated and you know, it seems like maybe a practical way to make progress is to get somebody to put pen on paper and start writing something and get the ball rolling and try to... We do have something it's not like we have nothing and plus, in all fairness I must say that the whole charter business was only what I don't even remember exactly when but you know, the identity working group was first constituted right from the beginning as a forum for talking about the different not to put out a paper and of course the paper business came later and you know, there are other groups that were tasked with writing a paper right from the beginning like the white paper working group I mean, I know that in terms of the architecture at least you have a way to split it by things like consensus, algorithms you know, smart contracts and so on and so forth but in the identity world you know, it is difficult because the topic is... We lose Vipin? I was not wondering as well I wasn't sure if it was just me I heard him sort of phasing in and out I wonder if he was pacing around and lost his sound Let's give him a second to see if he pops back So a small point on this a lot of the architecture working groups outputs have come as a result of kind of a smallish number of people maybe four or five like meeting somewhere for a day and just really trying to crank out work I say we lost Vipin let's give him a minute see if he can dial back in Yeah, but also especially if you look at the hyper ledger like the specific produce that we have consensus is a little bit easier to talk about because everybody has some smart contracts logic that is shared on the chain you know, so other than Kilt and the AD the Indie Parts which also has some logic it's a lot more difficult to talk about in kind of, I don't know theoretical level overview and then state where hyper ledger believes all the I don't know speaks kind of fall into place together and how I don't remember but actually most of the people in the TSC may remember I brought up identity over and over, right in many hackathons and hackfests and it was very difficult to convince people hey why don't you use the equivalent of the Fabricier X5 or 9 thing because you are a different way of looking at it so to say a different way so maybe I don't know maybe easier maybe to ease the requirements so let's at least start with like a deeper overview of where we are today what's trendy in the markets and get feedback from the projects where you want to be and then try to get something bigger like hyper ledger level so it's going to be similar to what's hard to say let's take a group of like 4, 5, even 3 people that will ask around get the latest status look at what's out in the markets and then even do like a gap analysis by the way I don't think there's actually a gap in the negative way right I think we are very advanced in especially on commission chains hyper ledger is like leading most of the standardizations even though it's not like the standard people are looking up to how did Fabric do it so what do you do with Indy people are looking at identity where, how so I think there is a lot of potential here but it's not a similar it's a different breed it's a different animal then consensus, smart contracts or even a ledger or a mercury it's a very different kind of beast right so in terms of concrete suggestions for the identity working group where are we I'm sorry I was off for a minute I'm just saying that I think it's a more difficult problem it's a more difficult thing to look at the identity as if it's like all coherent and all the standards are out there just like you know today it's very easy to look at the magnitude and how it's implemented the smart contract how it's implemented you know what's a validator that's a more generic term that we can talk on the hyper ledger level identity is a lot more fragmented right even inside a hyper ledger so it's a much more difficult problem so maybe to start with something easier just to kind of list out what we have where we are what would be nice to have because it's difficult to get like five people from different projects to agree on a standard now that will be meaningful right it's to you Vivian and to the whole the ACF, thank you it's certainly a complex topic this is Leonard Hens you know we have some missing parts of the document on identity and as Jonfin said it's very abstract I mean we don't have one standard for identity almost everyone in the world every consortia in the world is looking at self-solving identity to find a solution so there's no one solution that fits all that has been developed yet and therefore talking about standards is a moot point however we started a very abstract approach the document is not complete but there are missing parts and I think what we need to do is to plug in these missing parts with you know a right level of documentation that makes sense bearing in mind or bringing together all the different aspects of identity as we see currently happening out there based on self-solving identity now I just recently saw a video I think it's a sort of video called identity distilled and it makes a lot of sense because it considers the different sort of matrices and attributes that are very important with regards to identity so even around that as Johnson said we could use that as a nucleus of understanding and comprehension within the team and see how we can flesh it out further with the attributes that we've already considered within the architecture group as well as identity so I think that will help us because literally we've asked the volunteers to light up some of these sections it's not happening so we now need to go back and reorganize and try and do something ourselves I think if we leave it out there to volunteers it may not happen for another six months or more that's not true first of all that is not true there have been volunteers and they have contributed to the paper let's not get carried away by saying nothing is happening okay just stating the facts here I can give you a set of volunteers and what they have done don't make statements like that I said I said just the missing parts maybe you didn't hear that part dip in I contributed one section but we have some missing parts it's the missing parts I want to focus on because I said we have a paper maybe you didn't hear that part I do apologize but maybe you missed out it's only the missing parts we need to complete the paper and I'm saying we've asked a long time for volunteers but that isn't happening for the missing parts so how can we manage the missing parts I think this needs to be taken offline and handled in the identity working group in terms of who can do what and so forth are there any other thoughts for vipin based on feedback of the update thank you for managing this working group vipin yeah vipin has done a great job so far it's just that okay there is a level of frustration that we can't move forward with it and that's where we need the tsc's help right so if there's nothing else for vipin then I think we can call it a day and get people almost a half an hour back alright thanks everyone thank you all bye