If this is the first time you are joining the meeting of this WG and would like to introduce yourself - you can do so using voice or chat. Please use (name/affiliation/location) format

Sorry, juggling two meetings

https://github.com/trustoverip/deliverables/issues/4

I think you will need a Linux Foundation account.

How do I know if I have a Linux Foundation account?

@carly, did you sign up for TOIP? I think that creates the account

https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/19WEajAKEFftf98bDqLZ4G-igxa2mZg6AmbK8_M7YQBA/edit#slide=id.g8d7f9de172_5_1

You will have to use the same email that you provided while joining the Linux Foundation

Well, for what it's worth I just used my personal GitHub and got access..

hmmm

That St. Clair. He’s always going rogue…:-)

Will someone on the call be also able to edit the meeting page and scribe notes?

Wow, then it is open as mentioned by Dan

Maybe it is open, but we will always know who did what and what they did and can always go back…

I will scribe offline @Sankarshan and share/update later on - I hope that helps

Thank you Kalyan!

ACK. Thanks Kalyan.

I’m quite sure we’ll do some “storming” around the roadmap :-)

Moving from storming to norming requires strong leadership that can then back off once norming is achieved (and is almost invisible when performing is achieved).

Well said

We need to try and break the 80/20 rule...

…by which you mean, Jim?

Just the traditional challenge that 80% of commits are made by 20% of coders, in this case..

The Sovrin Governance Framework really only covers Layer 1 right now.

The new Sovrin Ecosystem Governance Framework will be for Layer 4.

Ya may want to consider the CONSUMABILITY of the WG work products. Meaning how does an Ecosystem or Utility pickup your templates and use them.

I’d want to also do a time check - we are halfway into the meeting. If we are going to pick and choose topics off the agenda - let’s do that to do justice to the audience participation today.

+1

+1 Dan

Dan, do you mean a spec to transfer info between layers?

As co-cahir of TSWG on we need to deliver Layer Interop Specs https://github.com/trustoverip/deliverables/blob/master/_process/work_products.md#layer-interoperability-specifications

@DanG, agreed. The primary focus of the TSWG is the space between layers to ensure interoperability. The primary focus of the GSWG is within each layer.

+1 Scott

Something like an API

Good analogy Drummond

“Battle of the Forms”

We are Input to Terms

There possibly would be an overlap between what GSWG brings out and Concepts group bring out and right one will probably make it to the books

We should assume that C&T will be required to minimally produce 4 glossaries (1 per WG).

What about a white paper that describes a prototype ecosystem from top to bottom presented in narrative story form?

Ooooh, I love that idea

Just a note, I mentioned in the TF call today this matches up with the 36 mo delivery on the ISO standard

+1 scott

I really feel we can get a template for Layer 1 pretty quickly.

@Scott, that sounds like a good deliverable for the Ecosystem Foundry WG that we and the TSWG could contribute to

Leverage outlines from Sovrin and BBU and you have a starter

@Dan, I agree that the template for Layer 1 should be first—and if we have enough people power, we could get it done by EOY

@Dan, good idea, and maybe leverage MyData, too. @Drummond, exactly.

+1 Drummond and I would go one step further .. we can offer tooling for generating web/pdf renderings of a template instance.

This is the page Scott is displaying: https://wiki.trustoverip.org/display/HOME/Classes+of+Verifiable+Credentials

LoA could be defined for any type of verifiable credential if it’s needed—but it’s highly contextual.

We need to use Scotts example content to make a point. How do we classify this Trust Assurance content. Is it in a template? Recommendation? Other?

IMO it is a Recommendation.

This is great work.

At current state it certainly reflects more as a recommendation but can transform into a template - one for each class

Another recommendation would be which class is best for a given type of credential.

It sets a good start

All good comments BUT we must strive for CONSUMABILITY of our workproducts. If ToIP is too complex it will be a hit against us.

Agree @Dan

How much diversity do you have in the room to engage with the governance. I see no women of color here. Very few women and my my read no folks from the global south.

Thanks everyone!

Great start