Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
586 lines (420 loc) · 32.7 KB

agenda.md

File metadata and controls

586 lines (420 loc) · 32.7 KB
tags
KERI, CESR, OOBI, ACDC, IETF, Concepts, Terminology, Education, Glossary

KERI Terminology and Education Meeting Agenda

hackmd-github-sync-badge

Host: Henk van Cann email Co-Host: Philip Feairheller email

Meeting Bi-weekly starting on 2022-07-28 at 10 am EDT, 4PM CEST

Agenda:

Zoom Meeting

Topic: KERI Concepts, Terms and Education

Time: Jul 28, 2022 08:00 AM Mountain Time (US and Canada), 4PM CEST

Every 2 weeks on Thu, until Oct 20, 2022, 7 occurrence(s)

  • Done Jul 28, 2022 08:00 AM + Aug 11, 2022 08:00 AM + Aug 25, 2022 08:00 AM + Sep 8, 2022 08:00 AM + Sep 22, 2022 08:00 AM + Oct 6, 2022 08:00 AM + Oct 20, 2022 08:00 AM + Nov 3, 2022 08:00 AM + Dec 15, 2022 08:00 AM + Jan 12, 2023 08:00 AM + Jan 26, 2023 08:00 AM
  • Up next
  • Feb 9, 2023 08:00 AM
  • Feb 23, 2023 08:00 AM
  • Mar 9, 2023 08:00 AM
  • Mar 23, 2023 08:00 AM
  • Apr 6, 2023 08:00 AM
  • Apr 20, 2023 08:00 AM
  • May 4, 2023 08:00 AM
  • May 18, 2023 08:00 AM
  • Jun 1, 2023 08:00 AM
  • Jun 15, 2023 08:00 AM
  • Jun 29, 2023 08:00 AM

Calendar Invite

Join Zoom Meeting https://us02web.zoom.us/j/89893527631?pwd=S1VheVF4d2xpTTRTdERYbFFGUFdPUT09

Meeting ID: 898 9352 7631
Passcode: 197037

KERI Slack: keriworld.slack.com https://join.slack.com/t/keriworld/shared_invite/zt-14326yxue-p7P~GEmAZ65luGSZvbgFAQ

Resources

Technical Concepts developed by and explained by prof. Samuel M. Smith
Direct links: All relevant white papers and a table of IETF-drafts of which the status is kept up to date.

Explanatory articles from Henk van Cann about KERI, CESR, OOBI, Autonomic identifiers:

KERI and ACDC for Muggles by Drummond Reed / Sam Smith

Docs about technical concepts behind KERI: Questions and Answers general and focussed on security, Glossary KERI and Glossary ACDC.

Explanation of KERI development tools and techniques (preliminary link): KERI development environment

Howto's of WebofTrust documentation effort in github project page: Howto

Meetings

Structure

  • Agenda
  1. 20 minutes - Roadmap documentation: Delta between WPs - Techn. Design and Code at various repos / branches
  2. 20 minutes - Q&A
  3. 10 minutes - Supported documents GLEIF use case

Future Topics

  • Steven: Try running the transcripts through ChatGPT to summarize

Discussion items

Please provide questions you want answered about a give topic in the chat. Any question about KERI-ACDC-IPEX-CESR-OOBI. Feel free.

Are there any terms you'd like to have defined?

Reverse engineer a concepts - document. Can we still use / refer to the KIDs (comments) at DIF? Where has this content gone in WebofTrust / IETF?

CESR: https://hackmd.io/GbQO3p6QTge-8eQMGuMaeQ#First-questions

2023-02-09

Philip Feairheller (host)
Henk van Cann (host)
Kor Dwarshuis
Kent Bull
Mark Scott
Joseph Hunsaker
Steven Milstein

Recording: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1hbsZDdBO8cQp9oneThAPAYz-O8UpxII4/view?usp=sharing

Topic

  • React/JSX Levels-demo Educational site
    • With React / DS introduced problems around IETF markdown -> the npm run build fails -> looking for a tool or a tip to automatically weed out (find+replace) failing complex markdown.
    • Levels integrated in test phase
    • Glossary available + local search
  • Dev tools fill out/ update
  • Kent: Developer-tooling CLI, how to bring developers up to speed
  • Joseph: SSI; what does it look like from an application standpoint in Web3 (UX)?

Notes

TrustoverIP: currently DID method resolver, it doesn't scale. We have a 100+ DID methods already.

We'll have a KERI DID method resolver: 3 types

  • ephemeral
  • OOBI based
  • Integration with watchers (GLEIF)

Watch Sam's Hourglass recording (Part 1). You can find the link at https://wiki.trustoverip.org/display/HOME/2023-02-01+TSWG+Meeting+Notes Part 2 was recorded yesterday but the recording is not posted yet. Look for "2023-02-08 TSWG Meeting Notes" to be posted on https://wiki.trustoverip.org/display/HOME/TSWG+Meeting+Pages

For a user: exchange OOBI and go. From a user perspective it's going to be: scanning QR codes, exchange a link in an email and then the applications take over. You don't trust the OOBIs, after OOBIs you know where the agents are located and then trust the keystate behind the entities. AIDs have reputation. The non-repudiable nature of KERI identifiers and attached reputation makes the difference (apart from the security aspect: verifiable to the root-of-trust)

Kent wants to write a blogpost: A 'hello developer'-experience, following a simple formula. "KERI: It's easier than you would expect from the 140 pages white paper."

Steven: GitHub Codespace for development?

2023-01-26

Philip Feairheller (host)
Henk van Cann (host)
Kor Dwarshuis
Mark Scott
Joseph Hunsaker
Steven Milstein

Recording: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1feAhz4VJUvNoLHQc7zNifuaHyFgDFFI8/view?usp=share_link

Topic

  1. Generic Governance Framework Documents - https://ibb.co/B2jgfVH Automobile example of implementation in a different line of work than GLEIF.
  2. Docusaurus, why it replaces Jekyll. License discussion of Docusaurus => MIT license, so we're good to go.

2023-01-12

Philip Feairheller (host)
Henk van Cann (host)
Kor Dwarshuis
Mark Scott
Joseph Hunsaker
Steven Milstein

Recording: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1atO-mnrXFuSX7mJQJhr8bhOqXdPMsCGI/view?usp=share_link

Topic

vLEI Governance Framework - where do users run into?

Kick-off slides of Henk: https://ibb.co/mFKGbBc Ultimate goal: improve the WOT-terms site with accessible and to-the-point information for the most important usergroups about the governance of vLEIs.

Discussion starts with:

  1. Where do users run into? (Bugs, ,explanatory resources not available, want help / support, .. )
  2. How do users get their input level of knowledge, both from the GLEIF side as from the technical KERI/ACDC side?
  3. How do users proceed? How do they get to results in their job?

Karla McKenna has written most of the GLEIF vLEI governance docs.

  • Action by Philip: Let's try to get hold of the WORD version via Karla, there's more automated semantics and structure compared to the PDF versions of the content.

Steven remembers his effort to understand the draft versions of the governance framework (pdfs to be found here ):

  1. Naming of the files is only distinctive at the end of the name
  2. There's inherently a lot of reference in vLEI to the LEI governance framework, but no direct links to right spots.
  3. Average required technical level is too high for a QVI.
  4. SSI without governance is anarchy.

The most important user groups in the VLEI ecosystem: GLEIF, QVIs, QVI's clients, Clients of QVI clients. Philip would focus on QVIs.

  • Action Henk: Look whether the QVI qualification program has enough bootstrapping information to answer Discussion points 2. en 3. above.
  • Action Henk: Ask provenant about what they run into and what they are willing to share.

Steven: the steps (Discuss 3.) to take are:

  • Framework
  • Policy
  • Conformance
  • Compliance

Joseph likes the idea of a more generalized approach. How could we write a selection of governance framework docs that work for GLEIF VLEIsm but also for 4 or 5 different application fields?

Henk thinks of documentation that uses lots of fields to replace the right terms for placeholders. And if the content is still correct for every implementation / use case at hand, then it is a generic governance doc.

Phillip: We might need documentation that is ahead of the governance framework PDFs. And answer questions like:

  • Why would you become a QVI?
  • And can you get started?
  • Why do I need a LEI at scale in the first place
  • And why do I need it now (can I postpone becoming decentralized?)

General unique selling points of KERI/ACDC in a governance framework:

  • reduce the opportunity of fraud
  • near-instantly get authorizations / credentials proveably from the root the trust of identifiers.

In any future application the connection of KERI-based identifiers will have to cope with an existing identifier system (example vLEI - LEI). The connection is managed in the governance framework and are expected to have general principles (independent of the use-case/implementors) and tailor-made rules. Practically KERI/ACDC solves the connection between legacy systems and decentralized systems with reputation: offering the old identifier's reputation as a credential attached to the decentralised counterpart-or-twin identifiers.

2022-12-25

Philip Feairheller (host)
Henk van Cann (host)
Mark Scott
Kent Bull
Joseph Hunsaker
Steven Milstein

Recording: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1UMfdzQNbSWWti1qRUdQQPGLg00Q3u_Ef/view?usp=share_link

Topics

  1. WOT-terms site review

PDF with 3 Q&As uploaded in Slack.

Governance needs to be in. It's half of the ToIP Stack. GLEIF issues Word documents soon. Henk will convert them to Markdown as soon as it's available. Apache 2 license so no problem to copy to the WOT-terms-site. The site is here (maybe broken link because temporary draft site)

  1. Ask Me Anything Joseph: How are the KERIPy architecture and components, how is this structured and connected? Neil: suggest to work the recording of this into a clickable infographic. But let the Youtube transcript do the work.

Philip answered Joseph's question and Henk's question about the personna we'd like to define from a GLEIF perspective using the WOT-terms website and Search engine.

2022-12-01 No meeting bc of Hosts bussy elsewhere

2022-11-18 No meeting bc of IIW

2022-11-04

Recording: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1P6V_RJNL_RFY5pL8tudqTe9iTsREos1c/view?usp=share_link

2022-10-20

Henk van Cann (host)
Ruth Choueka
Mark Scott
Randy Warshaw
Kent Bull
Joseph Hunsaker
Steven Milstein

Recording : https://drive.google.com/file/d/1NAJlSiIgYwYeiusbN-xYv7ePuAL_zBoW/view?usp=sharing

Topics

  1. Status reporting No table for CESROX yet. Were waiting fro Phil to contribute an improved structure of the tables.
  2. Mental Model Authentic Web

Mental model

The whole meeting has been devoted to Mental Model of the Authentic web. Below thoughts that have been shared and actionpoint distiled from this.

Objective
The objective of the agenda point was to create more understandable language to explain the mental model as described by Phil before.

Renarks made in a random order

We need a visual representation of the Mental Model - Steven
Phil's All The Way Down description is a pseudo code definition of the model

The forest of interconnectied trees - Joseph
We need labels to analogies we create - Joseph

What's the infratstructure I need for KERI? This is very hard to explain to the average interested person. - Randy People start comparing to what you can't compare. Sam Smith: KERI is the internet identifier Platypus

What are the key selling points of KERI - Kent

So you could attach your Authentic Web Tree in the forest of trees to bitcoin transaction and selectively disclose it. Adding anchored reputation to single transactions (e.g. BTC transaction hash in a TEL and sealed in a KEL). - Joseph & Henk

"the autonomous control of authentic data and relationships" Timothy Ruff Medium article

Randy: KERI solves the problem of trusted communication where we get good info as the basis of decisions Randy: KERI fully decentralized verifiability

Misinformation, fake news, cancel culture Answers to question like Where did you here that?, Do you know what it is, where it came from and whether it's true or not.

The phone calls and text messages example: "oh yeah?, how do you know it's authentic?"

KERI solves:

Henk: When I asked people do you need what KERI solves, it's always "I don't have this problem". Steven: they're not there yet. Too early to be specific about a mental model - Kent Henk: But which wording can we use to bridge the gap and raising awareness?

Joseph: it always seems to come down to personal assessment. Whereas I can or cannot trust certain curations of info by centralized parties like Twitter. Henk: there are certain features in the KERI suite that let's you inherit or borrow support from certain credentials in a cryptographical verfiable manner (e.g. chained credentials, OOBIs). I foresee curation algorithms on top of the KERI suite infrastructure to help you borrow trust from credentials (verifiably supported by third parties). Analogy: Tooling on top of public blockchains, the most basic being: blockchain explorers, e.g. https://www.blockchain.com/explorer/assets/btc

Agreement on these points

  • We stick to the definition of Mental Model that eSSIF-lab has introduced and try not to integrate but stay in line with them.
  • We acknowledge that KERI solves secure attribution (we're not going to argue cryptography), but not veracity, it only helps to assess it (Ruth).

Action

2022-10-06

Henk van Cann (host)
Philip Feairheller (host)
Mark Scott
Randy Warshaw
Kent Bull
Steven Milstein

Recording : https://drive.google.com/file/d/1MPeX8aN6D7HoWHTKDleq4QqFnyl7ozYk/view?usp=sharing

Meeting minutes

Henk reports efforts put into educational resources the last fortnight:

  • Machine Readable Glossary (MRG) - together with eSSIF-lab. Here is an example how a MRG glossary can be imported into "our" documentation site in the making. Data based on YAML, Liquid-based reporting, Jekyll static site on Github project page.
  • Import, filtering (levels of understanding, tags, categories), automatic site generation. Example. How can we bring back the human scale into the KERI-complexity equation. Next step: pimp up copies of the various whitepapers.

There was a lively discussion which you can revisit in the recording. Some interesting points highlighted (feel free to amend!):

  • Which Christopher Allen paper is being referred to?

  • The 5 Whys

  • Usecases seem the final most important step: what problem -> (reserved documented) design principles -> use cases (real-world examples). We chose a step by step approach, today what problem does .... solve?

  • Not all people need to be offered solutions. The helicopter view on problem solving that can achieved with the KERI/ACDC suite (only), could choose wording that resonates with all human beings, as well as the experts. However the problems auxiliary systems solve could have a more technical nature. They serve the greater good, and you could ask yourself 'what derived problem does ... solve?'

  • That does not absolve us from thinking about the main problem that KERI solves; indeed, we might even create a derived hierarchy with sub-problems descending from the big picture.

  • Issue closed; Draft Meaningful problem-solving opened. Feel free to amend and/or comment.

  • One last topic that has only been touched sideways: we are very lucky to have Sam on board, because the hard work has already been done relentlessly over the past years:

    • anchoring every design choice in scientific literature and/or
    • laid out concepts in over-night written whitepapers and
    • numerous responses in polemics with fellow experts in issues, social media, at IIWs, etc.
    • we're negotiation with Google to add a new language pair SAM - EN in Google Translate; the 'detection' mode is a vital feature

    One of my favorite quotes of Sam: "You may dislike KERI but don't tell me KERI can't do it" And next he'll tell you exactly how it can. So we only need to reverse document the creation, for KERI+ACDC's concept have already been anchored in history.
    Does this sound biased? :)

2022-09-22

Henk van Cann (host)
Philip Feairheller (host)
Mark Scott
Randy Warshaw
Harold Carr
Ruth Choueka

Recording : https://drive.google.com/file/d/1L2xVBV7xwirKn7q2RSwFFLnRN3LAjB_v/view?usp=sharing

Meeting minutes:

Progress

Question & Answers

Ruth Choueka : Are there different types of rotations? For instance is it different if you rotate because your private key is compromised, or you rotate because you want to add another signing key?

Mark Scott : Another rotation type, delegation?

Henk van Cann : Reverse engineer a concepts - document. Can we still use / refer to the KIDs (comments) at DIF? Where has this content gone in

Harold Carr : What does KIDS mean? Answer: KERI improvement documents or implementation docs. link

Ruth Choueka : Are all of the ACDC field names fully documented? Answer: yes. See the IETF ACDC draft.

Questions about writing CESR adapters: https://hackmd.io/GbQO3p6QTge-8eQMGuMaeQ#First-questions Philip Feairheller : https://github.com/WebOfTrust/ietf-cesr look at the master table and connect with Sam Smith to grant / reserve letters. We're up to 'M' now.

2022-09-08

Mark Scott
Henk van Cann (host)
Philip Feairheller (host)
Ruth Choueka
Kent Bull
Steven Milstein

Recording : https://drive.google.com/file/d/1KqW82Syaelnw_AJuAwL31-FzPqn6UvA9/view?usp=sharing

Meeting minutes:

Additions to issues and draft

Recovery vs. rotation

Ruth: what's the difference between recovery and rotation in KERI? Rotation is recovery, why do we use 'recovery' as a term? Henk: In the KERI/ACDC team we have to formulate our criteria whether a certain term covers something of our interest. Phil: In KERI recovery of an identifier is performed using rotation.

Base and IP of glossary terms

Steven: why do we disperse terms over various repos?
Henk:

  • it's historically grown that we store our terms at toip, using their software machinery (Github actions).
  • we reuse terms defined by other SSI umbrella organisations (e.g. Toip general glossary) only if we happen to attach the same meaning to it or when it's useful to put our definition and criteria in a different perspective.
  • There's only one place where the glossary resides; the master glossary (currently here)
  • The resulting website is at WebofTrust and uses a harvested copy (or "slave") of the glossary and modfies the data in a semi-automatic way. Reason: to be able to present with a more sophisticated user interface: context sensitive, filtering, side menus, search, comments options etc (here); status: development - test site.

Appeal

An appeal has been made to assign the task in the issues to yourself and contribute with effort (apart from much appreciated words) to the solution of the issues (and to the creation of their intended results).

2022-08-25

Ruth Choueka
Kent Bull
Steven Milstein
Joseph Hunsaker
Mark Scott
Henk van Cann (host)

Recording : https://drive.google.com/file/d/1JNjCJQJ3V26GXYPdhYoZ40B2hfkOKjCs/view?usp=sharing

  • Actionlist Henk suggests to work together (joint effort). He will therefore list actions that are still pending as a result of the former two meetings and this one. He'll use the Github issue functionality where we can assign ourselves to - or accept tasks and also track progress and completion. See the current list of issues and feel free to accept a task and / or create one of your own.

  • Agenda of this particular meeting:

  1. 20 minutes - Roadmap documentation: Delta between WPs - Techn. Design and Code at various repos / branches
  2. 20 minutes - Supported documents GLEIF use case
  3. 10 minutes - Q&A
  • Minutes

  1. Roadmap It's important to realize this is about the KERI / ACDC roadmap and not our own roadmap in the Concepts-Terms-Edu group. It's too early to have an Edu roadmap and "eat our own dogfood". Discussion Ruth: What is and what is not implemented : Watcher service (Not), revocation (is, but not working)
    Joseph: where are we, so I could recommend certain parts or applications of KERI
    Steven: what's GLEIF and what's KERI?
    Kent: focus on Key management in the roadmap (+ storage / rotation )
    Kent: 3 stages: familiar with KERI -> easy CLI to demo -> to do a basic reference implementation
    Steven: 3 usecases for what hasn't been created yet: what would you do with KERI if you had it?

  2. GLEIF use case Steven/Kent: GLEIF is a good start, but centralized, a "phone home" solution.
    Steven: What is the actual problem we're trying solving? We need to find the problem - solution - fit. Can we demonstrate that we understand what their problem is?
    Joseph: In the past before we had Single Sign On. And people got it when we got SSO "single sign on is great". Now we have KERI, which is basically SSO on steroids. "This is my end-all-be-all SSO for life" -> that would be selling a problem.
    Steven response to Joseph: 'It's not the problem GLEIF is solving.
    Kent: GLEIF solves the problem of verifiable legal attestations in control of the company, but sharable in a zero trust architecture and verifiable in a decentralized manner.
    Steven : is a centralized trust registry which is anti-decentralized. Ruth : GLEIF is the root of trust, indeed.
    Henk: Could we describe the actual situation in the GLEIF implementation and how far away it is from the real unique value proposition KERI / ACDC has? And how it could change in the future?
    Kent: We need a much more spohisticated educational resources than just the recordings of a technical demo.
    Ruth: It's great that GLEIF is working worldwide and that vLEI is an actually used identifier.

The demo footage of Steven and Phil that's been discussed was this one. The essence of the discussion was that it takes a big effort to make these kinds of vids accessable. Is it really the way to go. Maybe for our current target group (ID-, SSI- and Autonomic ID experts) but definitely not for the average citizen.

  1. Q&A A few practical issues where raised where to find what. It is possible to comment in Hackmd.io to the text. The hosts will edit the minutes accordingly and cherry pick from the saved chat, upload the recording. It's also possible to raise a github issue here

  2. Chat - recommended links and podcast

15:18:00 From Steven Milstein to Everyone: https://www.yubico.com/solutions/cryptocurrency/ ? 15:28:09 From Kent Bull to Everyone: https://podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0cHM6Ly90aGUtcnVicmljLmNhc3Rvcy5jb20vZmVlZA/episode/aHR0cHM6Ly9ydWJyaWMuY2MvP3Bvc3RfdHlwZT1wb2RjYXN0JnA9MTg5Ng?ep=14 And https://podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0cHM6Ly90aGUtcnVicmljLmNhc3Rvcy5jb20vZmVlZA/episode/aHR0cHM6Ly9ydWJyaWMuY2MvP3Bvc3RfdHlwZT1wb2RjYXN0JnA9MTkwMA?ep=14

2022-08-11

Present:

Kent Bull
Steven Milstein
Petteri from Ubisecure
Henk van Cann (host)

Comments about minutes July 28? No input, so July 28 fixed.

  • Recording: {no recording made}

  • Agenda
    20 minutes - concepts & terms
    20 minutes - use cases (meters-narrative: objective measuring, license plates-narrative: counterfeit obvious?: , ...)
    10 minutes - Q&A

  • Minutes
    Steven stresses his focus on the actual Markdown.
    Kent would like to document the difference between the white paper and the current state of KERI code
    Kent offers to take CESROX down the path of what the concepts file intends.
    Kent/Steven would want to list the major "decentralised identity" projects (inside and outside ToIP / IETF context); resulting in a mindmap for usecases of our own KERI/ACDC proposition to offer context.
    15:18:40 From Steven Milstein to Everyone:
    Example Mind map in markdown https://hackmd.io/@stevenmilstein/SkCKy9fC9\ An example use case generator for KERI/ACDC would be 'Centralised won't work!", so then we HAVE TO move over from old way of thinking and creating systems to the new ones available.
    Petteri would like to see 'Abstractions' in our documentation, "I don't need to understand everything of GLEIF and vLEI, just the essence"

Concepts.md file walk-through

15:16:40 From Henk van Cann to Everyone: https://hackmd.io/TYKEsJ5OQy-4w78NUGRSMA?view ; here is where you could amend the content, I'm able to push the result to the WebofTrust WOT-terms repo. It's also possible to offer a PR (pull request).

15:31:48 From Henk van Cann to Everyone: @steven : https://github.com/trustoverip/acdc/wiki this your KISS link to the actual MarkDown?\

Mind you, there is no global search available there. But here in the resulting static site: it is possible! you could search & find “{TBW prio ..}“, To Be Written it means, and then use the links to go to the right wiki-item to amend to my definition.

Discussion and change of agenda for the next meeting(s)

There was pretty soon consensus about the argumentation that someone brought up that:

  1. we must document the GLEIF use case very well. All eye will be on that and Google needs to resolve at our documentation.
  2. We should attract other programmers to the project by showing a convincing roadmap and the delta between (the state of) Whitepapers, the state of technical design papers and the actual code in various branches and it's also important to have direct links to them.

The current agenda items are suitable for offline processsing:

  • concepts and terms: the tools are there to amend, feel free to do it
  • more usecases, less focus. We have our minds and hands full on GLEIF.

2022-07-28

ToDo

  • organize host rights - request sent Aug 11 by Henk to Philip/Sam

Present:
Philip Feairheller (co-host)
Henk van Cann (host)
Kent Bull
Steven Milstein
Joseph Hunsaker
Mijo Kaliger
Michal Pietrus

  • Recording {no recording made}

  • Agenda

    1. Why are we doing the Terms & Edu call?
    2. What are the main sources of info / concepts / terms currently for KERI/ACDC
    3. How to sync glossaries with the outside world, a proposal
    4. How to set up KERI/ACDC education at various levels of understanding.

  • Minutes
    Skipped round of intros, but asked for personal motivation to join the Zoom meeting:
    Steven misses the foundational work to structure the KERI and ACDC terminology: "It's a blur full of acronyms, I would like to change this"
    Kent sees SSI in general and KERI/ACDC in particulier being able to change the current power dynamics (e.g. CBDC, central bank digital currencies) for the good: control over your identifiers. "I'd like to do this via strictly open source development on one hand and the development of courses as a commercial activity on the other"
    Joseph's preference is top down approach, but minimalistic. He sees Use cases as the most important stepping stone to a sophisticated Terminology base, "and from this custom made towards target groups."
    Philip stresses the importance of getting the word out. "We've been working heads done to get the code ready, now it's time to document it properly"
    Mijo is in de provenance team and working with on Kimi the mobile interface. That's his perspective, he recognizes the jungle of wording Steven pointed out and want to learn what KERI and ACDC is all about.
    Henk presented his personal motivation during the presentation.

Presentation

Google slides meant to introduce three of four agenda items (1,3 and 4).

Main take away: What Henk would like participants to do is

think about what's important to you as far as adoption of KERI/ACDC is concerned Our target groups apart from the KERI/ACDC development teams, are:

  1. The participants of this Zoom meeting series
  2. People working for Foundations like ToIP, eSSIF and DIF
  3. SSI Experts
  4. Experts working in the security and Identity field

Henk suggest to explicitely not target the outside world (family, friends, etc) to try and convince, because that'll be another level of complexity to achieve?

Get the content out

Steven strongly advices from his experience (with analysis paralysis) to:

  1. Keep the .md harvesting manual, simple and get the content out. Joseph adds:
  2. Describe credible use cases and
  3. derive target groups from use cases, not the other way around.

As dicussion evolved during the meeting, we've changed this to usecase-based way (the voting example and the 'I control my data' narrative; by Kent) of thinking and to keep it very practical and simple.
We need appealing narratives.

One idea was to OCR one or both presentations of Philip that have been recorded.

Steven express his wish for easy to use Developer-tooling CLI, and Docker containers to able to demonstrate KERI/ACDC to others. Philip says the status of the currently outdated Docker container of Keripy and Keep: 'to be updated soon'.

The meeting concluded with the structure of the future agenda (by Philip): time-slot based, and addressing the topics list under the new agenda for the next meeting.