[Openid-specs-digital-credentials-protocols] Fwd: WGLC for HAIP First Implementers Draft

[Orie Steele]

I support moving HAIP to implementers draft.

On Thu, Feb 6, 2025, 7:33 AM steffen schwalm via
Openid-specs-digital-credentials-protocols <
openid-specs-digital-credentials-protocols at lists.openid.net> wrote:

>
> Hi Kristina,
>
> thanks for your email. I assumed that editors observed developments on
> legal and technical subjects related to HAIP and integrate those
> developments in the specification to ensure it´s feasibility for certain
> application areas. As the developments occured for W3CVCDM in 12/2024 this
> shouldn`t be the issue to integrate in the specification as it essential in
> legal terms. Similar with ETSI TS which was published in draft since 12/24
> too.
>
> So basically *I upheld my objection* against the implementers draft to proceed
> to the public review. It shall be adjusted acc. eIDAS and mentioned
> standard in case the aim is relevance for eIDAS ecosystem.
>
> Best
> Steffen
>
> On Thu, Feb 6, 2025 at 2:23 PM Kristina Yasuda <yasudakristina at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Steffen,
>>
>> As Joseph beautifully explained in the original email, this is not the
>> final version of the specification. We want to use Implementer's Draft
>> process to "receive feedback from a wider group of people to ensure the
>> spec is the best it can be by the time it goes to final".
>>
>> Also, two things you mention in your email "W3CVCDM v1.1 and ETSI TS 119
>> 472-1" were not in the requirements list that OIDF DCP WG received from the
>> European Commission. Also, they have not come up in DCP WG previously. If
>> you can open issues, we can definitely discuss and get WG agreement on how
>> to proceed on those items but we can do that during or after the
>> Implementers draft process, and this should not be a reason to slow down
>> starting the implementers draft process itself.
>>
>> Best,
>> Kristina
>>
>> On Thu, Feb 6, 2025 at 12:28 PM steffen schwalm via
>> Openid-specs-digital-credentials-protocols <
>> openid-specs-digital-credentials-protocols at lists.openid.net> wrote:
>>
>>> I do not agree as the HAIP does not reflect the Implementing Acts and
>>> standardization in Europe related to eIDAS (Art .5a which includes
>>> W3CVCDM v1.1 and ETSI TS 119 472-1 relevant for trust services under eiDAS).
>>>
>>> As HAIP is so only limited useful is shall be updated accordingly
>>>
>>> Best
>>> Steffen
>>>
>>> On Thu, Feb 6, 2025 at 10:24 AM Giuseppe De Marco via
>>> Openid-specs-digital-credentials-protocols <
>>> openid-specs-digital-credentials-protocols at lists.openid.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I support moving HAIP to Implementer’s Draft
>>>>
>>>> best,
>>>> G
>>>>
>>>> Il giorno mer 5 feb 2025 alle ore 00:08 Joseph Heenan via
>>>> Openid-specs-digital-credentials-protocols <
>>>> openid-specs-digital-credentials-protocols at lists.openid.net> ha
>>>> scritto:
>>>>
>>>>> Dear Working Group,
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> As discussed on the Thursday working group call last week (and also on
>>>>> today’s working group call) we would like to get WG consensus that the
>>>>> current HAIP draft is ready to start the Implementer’s draft approval
>>>>> process.
>>>>> Please respond to this email *within the next 2 days, by Thur Feb 6th
>>>>> end of business hours in PST*, whether you believe the current draft
>>>>> should proceed to the public review or not. (Apologies that we didn’t
>>>>> manage to get this email out after the Thursday call as originally
>>>>> discussed!)
>>>>>
>>>>> The HAIP document to be reviewed can be found here:
>>>>> https://openid.github.io/oid4vc-haip/openid4vc-high-assurance-interoperability-profile-wg-draft.html
>>>>>
>>>>> The primary reason for starting the (somewhat lengthy) implementer’s
>>>>> draft process at this point is that doing so now is the only way to publish
>>>>> an implementer’s draft and still hit the timeline to publish a final
>>>>> version of the spec by the end of June, which we want to do in order to hit
>>>>> the timelines promised to the EU, ISO, etc.
>>>>>
>>>>> We certainly don’t view this spec as final - this is very much just a
>>>>> step on the journey, and there may well be comments that arrive during the
>>>>> 45 day public review period that the working group chooses to fix before
>>>>> the voting period starts. There are also a number of open issues in the
>>>>> GitHub issue tracker that the working group wants to solve before we take
>>>>> HAIP to final (you can see the list currently tagged for 1.0 Final here:
>>>>> https://github.com/openid/oid4vc-haip/milestone/2 - please let the
>>>>> chairs know if you think anything is missing from that list).
>>>>>
>>>>> I feel having the public review period and receiving that feedback
>>>>> from a wider group of people is very important to ensuring the spec is the
>>>>> best it can be by the time it goes to final.
>>>>>
>>>>> The details of the Implementer’s draft approval process can be found
>>>>> here: https://openid.net/wg/resources/approving-specifications/.
>>>>> This email is about the first bullet point on this list, which is
>>>>> sometimes called Working Group Last Call (WGLC).
>>>>> The next steps are to start a 45-day Foundation-wide review, followed
>>>>> by the 7 day voting period (the poll itself will open 7 days before the end
>>>>> of the Foundation-wide review ends). If all goes smoothly the official 7
>>>>> day voting period will hopefully start on Mon 24th March.
>>>>>
>>>>> Kindest Regards,
>>>>> Editors & Chairs
>>>>>
>>>>> Note that, a 7 days WGLC review period would have meant that a 45 days
>>>>> review would start on 24th of December, which overlaps with the Holidays.
>>>>> Therefore, also taking into account that it has been discussed a number of
>>>>> times and agreed in the WG that the WG would like to start the WGLC of
>>>>> OpenID4VCI once two specific PRs are merged, the DCP WG made a decision on
>>>>> Dec 17th WG call to do WGLC in 2 days
>>>>> --
>>>>> Openid-specs-digital-credentials-protocols mailing list
>>>>> Openid-specs-digital-credentials-protocols at lists.openid.net
>>>>>
>>>>> https://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-specs-digital-credentials-protocols
>>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Openid-specs-digital-credentials-protocols mailing list
>>>> Openid-specs-digital-credentials-protocols at lists.openid.net
>>>>
>>>> https://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-specs-digital-credentials-protocols
>>>>
>>> --
>>> Openid-specs-digital-credentials-protocols mailing list
>>> Openid-specs-digital-credentials-protocols at lists.openid.net
>>>
>>> https://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-specs-digital-credentials-protocols
>>>
>> --
> Openid-specs-digital-credentials-protocols mailing list
> Openid-specs-digital-credentials-protocols at lists.openid.net
>
> https://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-specs-digital-credentials-protocols
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openid.net/pipermail/openid-specs-digital-credentials-protocols/attachments/20250206/ebb2fd2a/attachment.htm>