Skip to content



These meetings are covered by the Antitrust Policy and the Code of Conduct.


TAC Voting Members

  • David Zeuthen
  • Jeremie Miller
  • Pete Cooling
  • Stavros Kounis
  • Tracy Kuhrt
  • Troy Ronda
  • Wenjing Chu

Action Items

  • Create recommendation for governing board for licenses that are compatible with Apache 2.0 to be approved -- Tracy
  • Update PR to answer questions asked during the meeting -- John
  • Determine if Energy Web Foundation is willing to relicense VC-API -- John

Meeting Minutes

  • Announcements

    • Credential Format Comparison SIG will meet on Wednesdays at 4pm CEST on alternate weeks to the TAC (next call September 13)
    • OID4VC Due Diligence task force will meet bi-weekly on Tuesdays at 5pm CEST (next call September 12)
    • Architecture SIG meets weekly on Mondays at 11am US/Pacific (next call September 11)
  • Review action items from last meeting

  • Welcome new TAC member

    • We welcomed David Zeuthen, Google premier member representative
  • VC-API Project Proposal

    • How does this codebase relate to the energywebfoundation/ssi?
      • Does this proposal refer to the ssi repository OR only to work under the /vc-api path?
        • The intention is to bring over only the /vc-api path. We could consider whether it makes sense to bring over the other application, but it would require a separate proposal.
      • Are there dependencies or references to any implementation outside this folder that need attention if it is the latter?
        • Refer to the "Source Control" section of the proposal for information on what the dependencies are for the VC-API
      • Could we prepare a list of all the single repositories the vc-api needs and will be part of this proposal? I would also suggest supplementing this list with the purpose of these additional repos and their relationship/dependencies to vc-api.
        • This is captured in the "Source Control" section of the proposal.
      • For licensing purposes, will we leave related repositories in the organization they currently are? Should we expect a licensing conflict in this case?
        • John will follow up on the license with Energy Web Foundation.
      • What referenced tutorials and documentation will moved from energywebfoundation GitHub organization to the OWF?
        • Yes, we can move the tutorials and documentation into OWF.
    • Is this project an implementation of a VC API server or also client/wallet libraries?
      • Server only
    • Is this project based on the latest version of the CCG VC API? Does it already implement the full community report?
      • It implements the latest published version of the CCG VC API. It may be missing one or two endpoints. I don't think that we have implemented derived presentation.
    • Which credential formats and signature formats are supported?
      • Those that are supported by SpruceID's DIDKit
    • How have you tested interop?
      • We have not yet tested interop. The testing that we have done is with the available test suites.
    • What will be the prefix for this project?
      • We need to determine a way in which projects can be separated if they implement the same specification. Project prefixes are a way to do this and will allow us to trademark them in the future.
    • License
      • John to follow up with Energy Web Foundation about the possibility or re-licensing
      • Develop recommendation for the OWF governing board on licenses that are compatible with Apache 2.0
    • Missing DCO on existing repository
  • Call for code from the community

    • If you know of any potential projects that might be of interest to the OpenWallet Foundation, please let a staff member know so that they can follow up
  • Open discussion and next steps

    • Next meeting is September 20, 2023