[wg/fedid] Federated Identity Working Group Charter

[plehegar]

New charter proposal, reviewers please take note.

Charter Review

Charter:

What kind of charter is this? Check the relevant box / remove irrelevant branches.

• New

• New WG

Horizontal Reviews: apply the Github label "Horizontal review requested" to request reviews for accessibility (a11y), internationalization (i18n), privacy, and security. Also add a "card" for this issue to the Strategy Funnel.

Communities suggested for outreach:
?

Known or potential areas of concern:
?

Where would charter proponents like to see issues raised? (this strategy funnel issue, a different github repo, email, ...)
https://github.com/fedidcg/fedidcg.github.io/issues

Anything else we should think about as we review?

[plehegar]

cc @hlflanagan @asr-enid @timcappalli

[plehegar]

(advance notice should hopefully be out tomorrow)

[melvincarvalho]

Naming clash here with the existing spec "Web Identity and Discovery" authored by Henry Story, Tim Berners-Lee et al

https://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/webid/spec/identity/

This spec will quite possibly be part of the solid WG too.

This has been in use since 2005, and is a different technology.

The federated identity community group should choose a name less likely to cause confusion, or perhaps revert back to the original title.

[plehegar]

"Web Identity" is pretty generic. Certainly, Solid doesn't pretend to define on Web Identity is done in general either. On the other hand, the overlap between the Solid WG proposal and this group is concerning. None of the Group proposals should move forward without this getting resolved.

[hlflanagan]

@plehegar My read of the Solid WG proposal is that it focuses on use cases where the user does not have an identity provider. The Web Identity Credential proposal covers what happens when the user has an identity provider, making sure that the user consents to the information being shared between an RP and an IdP for the purposes of authentication.

Would adding a note to that effect in our charter resolve your concern?

[plehegar]

Advance notice was sent in September.

[hlflanagan]

@plehegar We'd like to emphasize that the WG name is not the same as the spec name. We think the proposed WG name aligns well with the focus of the discussions we'll have. If we keep this name and emphasize that the scope of work is complementary to the Solid effort, will that resolve your concern?