 Welcome folks to the 14th of June 2023 areas working group call. We are glad you're here. We have some good stuff today that will not be entirely about the open wall foundation for the first time in a little bit. And that will be good. This is a hyper ledger call and so the interest policy of the code of conduct are in effect. Links are here in the in the agenda. The agenda leak. I will add to the chat again. You are welcome to make any changes that you would like that are useful for the group to the agenda. That would be awesome. And if you would, I promised I wouldn't forever ask you to do this but today is probably maybe one of the last days to to actually get make sure we get everyone's name in the attendees list. That will help us to to manage for the open wallet foundation stuff. Discussion so if you would add yourself to that list that would be fantastic. And is there anyone new to our group that would like to introduce themselves. All right, announcements. We have the dice Europe and I was, I left this on there to remind myself it's also down below. These two things are both done. I was wondering if we could, if anyone was present at either of these either dice Europe or the deprespected at the did hack that could give us a little bit of a report on how it went. Anyone attend either of these events or participate them in any way might bring this up next week just because I know we have folks that were there that must not be here today. And so I might bring that up again. Is there anything on the announcements list that should be but isn't the northern hemisphere we are heading full on into summer mode. And so that's the spring conferences and is mostly wound down I do believe. Okay, any any projects want to share a release status or a work update for what's going on. Cool. Grateful for all the work that is done and there's a lot of it. So those new to the group there's most of the detailed conversations happen in specific groups to the code bases, whether it be AFJ or bifold or occupy or other those other, those other efforts and so I, there's a lot that goes on there. This is just kind of the central call there. Okay, we won't get a report out on dice Europe. So, here's what I have on the agenda today. We, there is a proposed agreement that I have written, and that's what the link is here that we can discuss. We can also discuss what other adjustments we want to make to areas as it sits. And that there was some discussion of things that maybe we should do anyway, even if it did not happen alongside a move to WF. And then Alex has some stuff for marketing here. I would like to briefly talk about the did peer unqualified did migration update. This was a topic just before we got involved in the, in the open law foundation discussions that I'd like to revive revive. And then we, if we have time we've got some open discussion for anyone to bring a topic up. Now, this is just a reminder for next week. Next week we are, we want to talk about mediators broadly. So any, any mediator efforts that exist projects that happen, etc. There's this was suggested by Stephen on the on the acopai call yesterday, I believe it was. And so, and this was a great topic. And so that this will come up, and we'll talk about all things mediators next week. Any adjustments to the agenda before we want to dive in. Oh, good to most here. Okay. So with that, let me open up this. I wrote this and, and, and then received a little bit of feedback first from some folks that I kind of passed through to make sure my, my grammar was good and, and things were happening. And so this is, this is a statement that I wrote after our discussions last week. And, and, and this is a proposal I'm bringing before the group that we in some way. And this is something that we need to discuss what the scope of this is in some way we release or otherwise publish this. It could happen alongside the open wall foundation, in which case we'll need to. If this group is good, we can take it to the to the open wall foundation and see if they want to joint publish something along these lines. Or it could be just something that we publish directly as a group. That kind of makes our, makes our intentions clear. So this is the, this is the statement here. You've got the link in the agenda and I've got to hear on screen. And so what I'm looking for today, I'm proposing that we publish this and that in some manner like I'm talking and we can talk about the details here in a second. And I am proposing that this, at least on the short term and in the broad scale settles the open wallet question, which is how does the areas work relate to the open wall foundation. You know, and or will there, will there be a move of all of the areas code over to the open wall foundation. We've had lots of discussion over the past couple of weeks and those recordings are available in the agendas. We've been talking about various aspects of that. There's been some really excellent suggestions and observations shared. And some of those remain actionable under this in the sense that that things that area should focus on or, or whatever can happen. And I suspect that Alex in his marketing notes later. I recognize the, the, the marketing problem of a misperception of what areas actually is that that we can also work on. So none of that as is excluded in any way by this. My goal was to some of these statements are going to feel a little obvious, but I, they may not be obvious to some of the folks that read this. I may not realize that the, that the, you know, compatible licenses and sort of common organization structure, etc. already allow for a large degree of collaboration and working together, and that we should do that. But, but not everyone is going to recognize that what this gives to us is it is it recognizes kind of the values and the shared goals, etc. And, and also the possibility for collaboration on a variety of things. Should it be new libraries or, or there's interest in some bit of code that happens to be in a code base that wants to be, you know, that folks want to, you know, extract and promote as an independent library, for example, would would would be fully, you know, fully within the, the intent of this. It does mention specifically that sharing of information between organizations would be useful. So, for example, it would be great to have sort of a general high level report out on, on, on progress within the open wall foundation within this areas call. And general report out on progress when the within the areas community into open wall foundation calls. And that that level of awareness can, can then prompt the, the other sorts of collaboration items that we want to work on. And so that's kind of the new action that this is that this is this calls for that I think would be really useful. And, and we can seek to make that happen. This doesn't necessarily preclude anything in the future from happening either but it changes the nature I think of the discussion of all of areas to rather how in more specific ways, the collaboration between areas in the open wall foundation would occur. So with all of that talking that I've done. I'm looking for questions, comments, feedback. Any of those things that would be useful for for the group to talk about. Sam, can I just ask a question, I guess, which is less about the text of this and I think what it perhaps doesn't say. Is that your position, if I'm interpreting correctly is that at this point in time anyways is he no reason for areas to depart hyper ledger and join open wall foundation. Instead recognize the value of collaboration and this would be the form that that would take is that a fair statement or am I misrepresenting something. Nope, I believe that's a fair statement. We've had some comments about not just the difficulty but the, the amount of effort required to actually move stuff between organizations. And that the open wall foundation being a little bit young is not quite in the position that would be ready to receive these things anyway. And so that that helps that that that kind of gets it so I believe you have recognized what I had intended to say, or directly perhaps but yes, I believe that your statement was entirely fair. Okay, thank you. Can you capture that on the document, maybe more clearly. That's a good question. I, or not. Well, I had my goal in writing this was to come up with something that that I thought we might be able to agree on as a group here that also gives some benefit to the open wall foundation, I can imagine. I'm not involved in leadership there, but I imagine that there are folks asking the, you know, the proverbial like, well, how's this really to the areas project. And this would this could give them a a something to lean on that kind of answers that question, but in a positive way. I didn't explicitly say it because I wanted to highlight the sort of possibilities for future collaboration rather than that statement including a negative saying we will not be moving code bases because that's not quite true. If there are efforts within areas that the maintainers want to, to move a library or an aspect of it, there's nothing inappropriate about that and that would not technically be true, according to the we would not move code bases statement and so I didn't say the know outright explicitly because I wanted to focus on sort of the future collaboration aspects of that. Anyway, that's kind of what was in my head. Warren. Yeah, I think it's, I don't think it needs to be in this document, but I would suggest that perhaps if this hasn't already happened that there is kind of some community agreement that that is in fact what the community wants that to remain where it is perhaps that consensus has already been reached. And which is, which is fine. I just was unaware that a decision had been taken, or perhaps that no decision meant that it's just status quo. Okay, but I don't think that needs to go in this document I think this captures, you know, in general what it is that a collaboration would mean as opposed to why we're choosing to collaborate rather than something else. So, so to be clear, there's been no formal agreement reached by the community. It's hard to do so without a proposal. So this is my problem. This is in some form my proposal of that action that we take. So, and so the call is great for discussion here. It's also important there's a lot of participants that don't make the regular meetings for time zone inconvenience issues, the world is inconveniently round as I say. And so, in addition to our discussion here, we need to allow community members the opportunity to voice support or, or objections to to this my intent was to post this as an issue. And then circulate that link to allow people to to voice their opinions separately. And so there would be no action taken until everyone has had a chance to do so. And I think a week is necessary to to make that happen. So, we circulate noises about about then, then by next week's meeting, folks can have taken a look at the proposed thing and sort of said yes or no there. So, so nothing has been taken. This is a proposal is kind of my suggestion of one of the actions that we can take as as part of this. Certainly other actions can occur. And, and we can talk about that that's later on the agenda like what do we want to do in addition to to this proposed statement. Thanks. Oh, good job. Sorry. I think what this, but where I think what we're trying to also say is that there's probably there's a little bit too high a degree of uncertainty about what moving with me. I think one of the reasons of the, like you mentioned the, the organization's level of maturity to support the level of activity that we have in Aries. And we're concerned about maintaining our momentum so it's kind of, this is a first step, but there could be other steps there will be other steps and definitely there's also other possibilities as the open wall foundation matures etc that are also possible. But one of the, the hopes that I have in taking this step is that it changes the nature of the conversation from the entire Aries scope to maybe to maybe more focuses on like steps of collaboration that could be taken in the future. So there's, there's lots of possibilities in the future. And I, and I was trying to focus on that in this. But, but still to some degree answer the, is all of Aries going to move immediately in response to this which in the answer there is a bit of an implied no. And we could make that explicit somehow, either as a as a group or something else. And that would, that would require more or less that we kind of write up a proposal and then and then vote as a community on that and that would be helpful. The, the, yeah. Alex, hands up. Thanks. Aside though. I don't know the use of this, of this, of this collaboration agreement, the statement. But if it was ever to be shared on the site or used for general consumption by. However, there's an opportunity maybe to bring in some more materials to sells an ugly word, but sell Aries and the benefits so depending on what the purpose the statements and where it might be used that could be an opportunity to have more on that basis to promote what we're doing and why it's a great solution no matter what the future of Aries is in relation to. I think there could be the intent of this would be published somehow. There's kind of 2 basic options. 1 is that we publish this as the areas community. And then, and then of course, the folks can can find it of course in reference at however they'd like. The other option is that we approach the open wall foundation with this and see if they want to make some sort of a joint statement. And in the joint statement arena, then, then there would be a little bit less of an opportunity to directly promote areas. But certainly in the self publishing option that is something that we could do. And yeah, just to hire the opportunity so I'm, I'm happy to contribute towards any wording. Should it go. I just think you know as a wider reaching maybe our first and I can know the book chance to kind of a number of new audiences and more clearly define areas to them in the ways like the high level ways we want to talk about it so just to realize opportunities let me know. Thank you. Awesome. Steve your hands up. Um, I think this is, this is great it does a couple of things it establishes mutual interest mutual respect between the project organizations. Well, kind of, while still maintaining independence and I think that's awesome I think that's the happy medium I think we've been looking for. It reminded me of about two years ago just over two years ago trust over IP and sovereign signed an agreement to strengthen collaboration and they released a joint PR. And I'm going to post that link in the chat. Maybe that will help with how we formulate whatever statement comes out of this. And yeah, organizations do that all the time. And I, and I think that's awesome that that we can do that here. That link would be super useful. Steve that would be provide some nice historical context. I am not a PR writer of collaborating organizations and so this was a bit of an effort for me to kind of come up with something that I thought would work. I'm also open to suggestions on modifications we could make to this. It is in comment mode, which means anyone can sort of add a comment to call something out or and I believe that allows for suggestions to within Google Docs. So that you can see the individual suggestions and how to integrate within the document so so that that's also open here I intended this, not as necessarily a final document but but kind of a formal proposal to talk about in some of those discussions can be what we'd want to do with the document in particular. So, cool. Excellent for that link I'm going to open it just so that I have it in my browser tab here and there's that statement. Yeah, I see organizations do things like this all the time, and it serves to raise awareness of both organizations while they work on whatever it is they're going to work on together. Right. Yes. Other thoughts. I'm particularly interested in hearing from people that don't like this. The only other thought I'd add is that reading it fresh is if it's a statement of a collaboration like the start of an endeavor. I feel that gets a little bit lost until the end. So if there's like something specific about this collaboration that adds something or is it just a statement of like, here's how we can generally collaborate. It's just the opening word of the headline suggests there was like an announcement of some kind and then I had to go more towards the end to find it so that was just a fresh take on it. So you're seeing just my newness at kind of doing this. What I think would be great is what Steve was kind of linking to as an example. There's a collaborative statement in this case. This is only half of it because we need to work with the open wall foundation to represent their interest here as well. Before we do that, I would want to the approval of this group to go ahead and do so to move forward in that way and I imagine this will get touched a lot and added to in that process. This headline here doesn't really represent exactly the collaboration agreement. This is really a statement about this collaboration possibilities made by the areas community, not really made by both communities. Because we haven't involved them yet. And so there's there's kind of two outcomes that we could pursue here. One is, yes, it's good. Let's publish it, but maybe fix the headline. The the other outcome is, yes, we like this, but we would like it to be made in collaboration with the open wall foundation, which I agree would be stronger. And so we, we could starting now ish or, you know, given sufficient time for the not present community in this meeting to voice their opinion to then engage with the open wall foundation in a joint statement like that. Brilliant. Well, I'm very happy to offer my, my time on on this as well as design so let me know some. I appreciate that Alex I am. I'm over my skis, as it were. Okay, let's chat more. So perfect. Yeah, we're so I know that you were, you know, soliciting. If, if any, you know, negative feedback at this point but I really don't have any so but I would like to add some, I guess some positive stuff I think the general intention of this is is good. I think it opens up a co marketing opportunity that could be provide benefit to each sides. And in the drafting of this. I think that the content should contain a little bit about what areas is about and what open wallet foundation is about and how they fit. So, and it doesn't need to be detailed but things like, you know, open wallet foundation focusing on wallets that, you know, serve a number of purposes including digital currencies and blah, blah, blah. And it varies with its, you know, history in doing identity and verifiable credentials as being part of what, you know, and being so stuff that allows the to see how they fit together. And why a collaboration would be beneficial. And then I think that can be a course sharpened and wordsmithed in conjunction with the open wallet foundation as well. I would be surprised if they wouldn't want to publish a statement like this, a collaboration agreement. And press releases could be made by both foundations. You know, so in general I like the idea and I think just a little bit more fit between how it comes together and why. So on the actual document, I think going back to the issue of, you know, why publish this in the first place. I think the framing of this to the community to solicit feedback that the framing of it has to say okay we've been there's been some discussion going on about joining open wallet foundation at this time. You know, my pain or the opinions of X, Y and Z are that perhaps that's not appropriate at this time could be in the future. And here is a way for us to do something positive that can benefit us both in the meantime and who knows where it'll go, but a way of setting up the framing of this so people know why they're looking at this in the first place. And that would allow for, you know, discussion, a on the overall premise, and then be on the collaboration agreement itself that people agree with premise. Yeah, I think there's some good points that sound that's, let's catch up because I can, I can bring some, some, some assistance to this. I think we could I think my first point of action would be to approach the open wallet foundation and see if they're interested in publishing a joint statement and then and then if they are, you know, producing a draft under there that would work. Like, you know, collaboratively that would work and we could address a lot of those issues at the same time. Yeah. And you can use the Linux foundation digital trust initiative as one of the framing points. I do mention that in here. Yeah. Yeah, we're both part of the digital trust initiative. That is small, but could be larger. One of the things that I have wrestled with is that in the the cross project collaboration stuff. What would happen is something that had that currently bears the Aries brand wants to sort of move that direct effort over to the open wallet foundation. There's a lot of I don't know and maybe team of this is why you're raising your hand. There's a lot of I don't know. One of the options there is to figure out how we can link the Aries brand to the digital trust such that such that that wouldn't be a choice you'd have to make. It's not like, well, the Aries brand has been decided to not move and so you can't. My goal is to enable the people doing the work on these projects to do them in the manner and in the way that makes the most sense for the effort and not have something like that be something that is a problem or holds back or something to that effect. So, I, the digital trust initiative may have a larger role there in that, and that it could help to collaborate between those two things. And that's, that's really, that was one of the unresolved thoughts that I've had I would need to understand more from from the Linux foundation. I might work as part of the digital trust initiative and what's actually there right now it's a little bit more nascent in the sense that it's a grouping of projects, but that's something that could be possible. Timo your hands up. Yeah, I think I'm not sure yet if I'm fully supportive of this current collaboration. But I'm having a hard time I think to articulate why precisely yet but I think I do keep feeding more and more for having Aries and its agent housed under an organization that is not focused on blockchain for enterprises, which Hyperledger is, and I think in the end the end goal of what Open Wallet Foundation mission is aligns more with the project itself. So, I'm not sure I, I agree with that we shouldn't make like decisions too fast. But yeah, I think that's that's my point where I'm still interested in looking from like at moving the project completely. Yeah. Timo, you have been one of the contributors of one of the largest selections of writing on this, which I really appreciate. And if anyone hasn't seemed I don't have a link handy but maybe someone can dig that up over on the Aries repo. Timo wrote a really excellent summary of his thoughts on on everything that was fantastic. So, a couple thoughts about that. One is is that this does give us a little bit of time while, at least in the large scale, answering initially the thing but this doesn't prevent future movements or anything else. It sort of felt like in our discussions as a community we sort of weren't, we'd reached the point where we weren't saying anything new. And so it felt like we needed some sort of a step taken rather than just no resolution in order to make it happen. This would allow, of course, under separate consideration of the, the, the maintainers of a particular code base would allow for the discussion and impossible movement of one of those. The goal would be to project the right message, meaning we're doing this to like advance and make better the project. And that's certainly still a possibility under this. The logistics of saying, yes, we're going to move everything is actually really, really messy. And as pointed out by others. And but as, as that decision does maybe seem appropriate in the future that can certainly happen. I, this doesn't really prevent anything from happening at all, but just gives a little bit of a soft step in recognition between the organizations that I believe would actually make some of those further conversations easier. So my intention of this was not to say no, we won't and that's why I wasn't included because I don't believe that that's necessarily the right answer. I believe that answering this and a little more granular level is perhaps more appropriate for for our purposes there. Does that make sense Timo. Yeah, no, I agree on that part. And endless discussions isn't going to move anything forward. And I think I agree we aren't ready as a community to make such a decision such a big decision. I just, I think I only want to reflect on like what I currently see as a good possible and cool, but I agree with like taking a slower step first. Yes, and I There are some really cool, I think opportunities cross org marketing, for example, could could we could substantially benefit from and that that also does not necessarily preclude any future action there so Okay, I anyone else have any comments that they'd like to make specifically about this. Okay, so in the spirit of gathering a vote here. What I'd like to do is is I'll make a specific statement and then ask folks to use the zoom reactions feature to to voice their opinion. And that way we can sort of gather what's, you know, and record what happened here. So the first statement that I think we'd like to make the most desirable I think outcome is a cross statement between the open wall foundation in the hyperledger areas project. And so the proposal here, I think is is that we approach the open wall foundation with this as a starting statement and engage with them to craft a joint statement. And this is sure to see modifications in that process. And that draft could be of course presented back to us as well as the open wall foundation for ratification. And so, if you are supportive of approaching the open wall foundation in seeking a cross collaboration agreement. Why don't we use the thumbs up for a yes, that you are supportive of approaching the open wall foundation for seeking an agreement. And just for completeness. Let's use the the no red X as a as indication that you are not supportive of that. Does that work. Okay, I have a thumbs up. Oh, you know what, I wonder how long these are going to persist but it's keep going. I'll put a thumbs up Sam. Okay, I'll count that john. You're welcome to do that verbally. I'm glad you're here. Ah, those are disappearing. Plus one in the chat. But I have to calm the now. Oh, that's annoying. So Timo Timo said yes and it isn't going away. So to revise my previous thing, if you will use the yes check mark instead or the no, then then that will be good. I think that may not disappear. We'll see what happens here. I'm up to 1416. Oh, raising hands could work but let's see these don't appear to be going away which is really useful Timo is the first one that I saw and hasn't gone away yet. Change my thumbs up to a checks. Yeah, from my perspective, the check does not go away until you tell it to go away like that. Excellent. Okay, we are near unanimous here for it with for that. I, I'm supportive of this. So that gives us like 21 out of our likes. Yeah, anyway, I think it's sufficient enough to be nearly unanimous and no one's voting no, which is the other thing. So let me record that. 24 out of 24. Yeah. Okay, I think that's good. And Alex you volunteered to be involved there I would really appreciate that. Yeah, so. Yeah, so very cool. And I can hit clear all feedback as the host. Okay. So, so that's the action. Let's take because that would be a stronger statement than just areas individually publishing that anyway. We'll go ahead and do that since there's no approval on that. Let's go ahead and take that to them this week. We can do that immediately and then we have a hopefully a week. I don't know how long that's going to take. But a week or two is what I imagine. And then we'll be able to come back and have something that we as a community can ratify. So excellent. Okay. Any further on that before we move on with our discussion. I appreciate everyone's patience with my attempts to find a resolution here. Grateful for your feedback. All right. Next on the agenda then. Oh, we haven't discussed what adjustments we want to make to areas as is, but given the sort of proposal that we've floated in the discussion. Why don't we table that for now. And we're going to hear from Alex about marketing and then we can come back to. We can come back to that in a future discussion because there are certainly things we can do. For example, it's been proposed that like did come protocol definitions and no longer get written inside of Aries and other things. And so those discussions we could have as we could do that independently of any of any code base move. Anyway, and so we should have those conversations to see what kind of things we want to update about Aries. In the meantime, and that could be more clarified to statements of purpose, etc. that we haven't updated in a really long time. And like since the beginning, I believe so that would be useful. So let me let me table this and then we'll bring it back. We're looking at the time probably not this week but but the next week or the week after that, so that we can, we can raise those issues because we want to make sure that the organization is reflecting the needs, the project reflects the needs of the people in it. Is that okay. Anyone object. Okay, Alex, I will turn this over to you. Thanks. All right, just need five minutes here. So I've been working behalf of BC gov john asked me to come in and didn't get the summary before just help improve some of the materials that really promote Aries and and talk about the great work that's being done because the short version I'm sure you're probably aware is that this fantastic tech, but not being communicated well necessarily and some of the materials that people might find coming to it fresh. And so I've been tasked with improving that situation. And what I do today is show you a document with some core talking points and commission talking points and benefits of Aries, and as a few things woven into it, and ask two things of you. One is any comments and suggestions for improving it. And number two is if you wish to be involved in the future possible discussions that are going a bit more into the strengths and weaknesses, opportunities, threats of Aries and other positioning stuff and welcoming put that way. So let me show you share the document first, which is also available through the meeting notes as well. I know you haven't seen it before so I won't go through it in detail now but to survive save the documents linked in the notes. And this is what I've got first of all, I'm here from fishing through previous meeting discussion, especially around Aries and talking to a few people in the community and looking what's there in existing way. I can general summary of what makes Aries Aries and what makes it what its key benefits are, and then broken down a bit more like part benefits, part features, excuse me, in these four sections below. And the idea is, if I can just jump around a little bit, the idea is to use this in places like this. I show you the Aries, if you search for Aries right now in Google, the top result probably for you is this page on the Hyperledger site, which has this partly dated, probably not quite correct, it's not just blockchain route anymore, for example, things like that and it's quite short and goes through original announcement. And this is one of several touch points where we need to update things. So to have a better presence on the Hyperledger website, to update the Wiki landing page, the Aries landing page in GitHub is another one. And there's probably more that you can point me the direction of. So the idea of these materials is that we have one core version of the key things you want to say, and we then repurpose those to fit in these other places as well. So still being built, I'll scroll down a bit here. There's going to be way to sort of Aries website page, a shorter summary that goes in there, and rather than go to the original announcements, some kind of learn more page content, perhaps a blog post of some kind. I'm speaking to, well I emailed Emily at Hyperledger about that because I think there's a new site design coming out soon and to fit in with that as well. And similarly, there'll be another version down here for the Wiki proposed content. So, to wrap up my little segment here, if you could please read through this, I welcome a few time appropriate comments now, but every bit of feedback is welcome from minor things to a complete disagree with this or you've missed this key benefit or don't say that. So the feedback like that is really welcome. You can do in the document, you've also got my email on the meeting notes at the top. And if you wish to be involved in more wholesome discussions. We dive in a bit more of a structured marketing activity. It's a great one for Digcom on Monday, which is excellent. And I wasn't sure if I'd get away with fishing on previous meeting notes and not need to do that. But I might do that if I get enough contention as to what we're describing areas that's here. So, basically, have a look at this, let me know and be more involved and welcome any comments you have right now as well. So, Alex, I have a couple of comments. I really like that what you've, what you've put together thanks for, thanks for doing this. I think that one of the things that I would. I would like to see come out of this which is not in here but may not be what the rest of the community wants is less focus on some of the features which I know are the core provenance of the origination of Aries, but aren't necessarily the, the potential direction and some of what's happening now so you mentioned, you know, a couple of credential formats, but there's no mention of supporting other protocols, and you mentioned zero knowledge proofs and there's other things that we do that don't do that. And so I'm personally looking for something like I look at the Aries toolkit as a potential Swiss Army knife for solving a wealth of these problems using different technologies for different problem domains. And this is still very much rooted in Aries. Origination legacy. And that's okay with me as long as everybody else agrees that that's what they want it to be but for me I'd like it to, I'd like it to be positioned more broadly. Brilliant. We need to do that for sure. It's John, like that leader that it's that this software is providing you with with them, as far as we know the maximum possible number of options that you can deploy depending on your, you know, depending on your solution needs. So it's not forcing you to choose a protocol or a tip method or a format or whatever. If it's not there you can build it and that it in. Yeah, that's really great feedback. And that's the kind of positioning stuff which I find really fascinating. There's what it is and isn't. There's what it used to be but isn't anymore and then there's also what it could do, but also we don't wish to necessarily promote really strongly. So, and I'm coming fresh to this you guys are the experts here. So for example, it is possible I understand to use to not use did come. And that may be desirable in some situations, however, using did come has a number of advantages that maybe don't necessarily promote that flexibility so strongly, because it brings a number of other things to the table. So, I think those kind of discussions as to how we position this I try to include some of that flexibility up here in the here in the future proof but if you need to make that clear and stronger than now is the chance because I think these key. So, what now says these how it stands up against the competition what people are asking about right now that's what I really want to know to shape these core messages before they start being repurposed out toward the touch point so yes thank you for that and any other thoughts are really really welcome. And that may need to be now like I said my email is there and if you want a bit of time to digest. And so any other thoughts and on how we need to better position it even beyond this are really welcome but will be really welcome in the next few days ideally so I can bring that to the table. Alex is great and I agree with the previous conversation. The other thing that is kind of mentioned here but not really explicitly is the use of standards defined elsewhere. And that includes, you know, like, presentation exchange stuff from the diff, for example, and even did convie to is from the diff and things like that and so it's not really stated that we don't hear but it's also not really stated that like that is. But this whole effort I think it's just fantastic. I think that trying to clarify this and everything else is a good exercise for us as a community to actually put words to what we think this is in a way that gives us a little bit more of a cohesive stated goal and also communicates more easily to everyone else just take a look at it. So really good. Yeah, that's really useful feedback and that was in terms of something on paper at least so we can say okay is this it is this it. And so really welcome all those kinds of things thank you so. And we've got to hand up. I'm sorry I totally going to butcher your name if I try so. No problem Sam this is a swashish with northern block for those who don't know me. Alex. The question I have is, who is this documented document intended for is it for a technical person. Is it for a person who's just deciding on a technology is it for a decision maker. Like that I'd like to get a little bit more clarity because from my perspective one of the most important things which I don't see mentioned here is the maturity of the technology. And the amount of effort and investment and where it's being used and all of that not been mentioned. If it's targeted for a decision maker. That's a very important piece that needs to be there. Thank you yeah that's that's great feedback the intended targets is fairly broad with these with, if you imagine like a stronger middle step at people coming in at a pretty a technical decision making level perhaps developers coming to this fresh point. I actually want to know what how the position is in their minds. It's like a starting point. I think there's enough detail down in the tech has to be wanting to get that teeth into it, but there's very little up. In 10 months you could extract things from this and take them up when you're making that presentation up to make a case for me to explore this further or get some time or or money whether it may be. The maturity use cases if there are people that are prominently using areas that are that I've said that publicly that we can start name dropping a few samples in here or have a separate collection of places where we can give some grab it as to what we're doing. Then please let me know. Yes that feedback to my mom I may mention the maturity as well off the tech. Yeah. My suggestion for your consideration would be to have two separate documents one which is technically focused, and one which is focused for a decision maker. And so you have two separate document maybe two sections. This to me this document should first go to a decision maker. And then they appreciated they buy into it. Then they hand over the technical thing to a technical person to say okay, you know this this is mature this is great if you're doing marketing it's a sales tool, if I understand it correctly. Right we're trying to convey to the world that look this technology has a lot of good stuff in it. It can go both ways it can be read by a technical one person who takes it to a decision maker it can be read by a decision maker and goes down to a technical person. Anyway that's that I just feel that that is missing and we are writing another technical document and not targeting decision makers. Okay, thanks for the feedback and yet there's a way to extract out some of the things that make it. What it is that can be less technical. I'm very open to that discussion. And I also that's excellent feedback. And I think we've got the good start on this here but of course mentioning sort of the scale and deployment, you know the success of it is is absolutely necessary here. One of the dividing lines between them, the decision maker and the technical might be the jump to the wiki a decision maker might be a little less inclined to jump to the wiki where a technical person might. And that might be a nice natural division to place the technical side of things over on the wiki it's also a little bit more editable, which means that, which means we can keep it updated without having to go through like official website content processes. And, and that could be a nice division line between the those two purposes. I think it's a chance to keep this isn't more technical and I think it's good points and then bring up a sense about to say like a higher level version of some of the broader talking points that reassure. And that's why I welcome the community's experience. So having been there with those people making those kind of decisions what's one of the concerns right now. What are they looking for. Is it future proofing and flexibility is it well, does it support W3C. So people saying that we can answer those off and maybe have like a separate version of this which is like, you know, more like a one pager, like a lot of data sheet, but like a summary thing that can be repurposed by people trying to make that argument. Yeah, that's fantastic. Okay, thanks yeah my emails there so please please reach out. Excellent. Thank you Alex for for this work and helping in this way. You're the in that this link is also shared in the meeting notes. And we'll get to the other stuff later, but we have just as just as a one minute. They did peer and I'll go three as we discussed has been actually merged into that spec, which is really useful. There are some other updates that spec that I think might be helpful to make the independent of that update. And so there's work there. And also the migration doc. Timo I don't know if you've had a chance it's been busy with conferences and things I don't know if you've had a chance to, to take a look at it at the dock that might describe the conversion of an unqualified did to a peer did. No, sorry just I forgot about doing this already. It's not like you, it's not like we haven't been to conferences and stuff all over the place. So no, no problem. But I feel a fair amount of urgency on that, in the sense that this needs to happen before a IP three. And it needs to be something that we wrap up as a community as soon as possible so I think that if you, if you are able to spend some time there that would be that would be, we'd be grateful. And it doesn't have to be done anything you've got I think it will give us a discussion point to be able to further that. So thank you Timo for that. And next week, we will we could touch on some of these other topics as well, but the main topic next week will be mediators and potentially some WF resolution stuff if we are able to turn that around that fast with the open wall foundation as that. So, excellent. And thank you all for coming. Appreciate you being here and I hope your week is a great one. Great discussion today. Thanks. Thanks. Thank you. Thanks.