Mapping to the layers will be helpful

Readable = Program be able to convert into decision tree to arrive at a conclusion

Privacy Preseving is one

https://wiki.trustoverip.org/display/HOME/GSWG+Process+and+Roles+Task+Force

We also may see possibilities where other WGs such as Utility and Ecosystem may also bring inputs to GSWG deliverables

I remember we talked about WGS being customers to each others

I will show you how the two stacks interact in my presentation on credential classes and credentials template, (if Drummond doesn't take all the time in this meeting...

Call for action - APAC members can certainly have this opportunity to start contributing here

https://wiki.trustoverip.org/display/HOME/GSWG+Governance+Architecture+Task+Force

That’s a good example of how governance frameworks and tech will be tied at the hip to make a specific trust assertion

+1 Good analogy of conjunction between the two stacks

Here is the link to Classes of VCs -

https://wiki.trustoverip.org/display/HOME/Classes+of+Verifiable+Credentials

This is a great stuff consolidated at one place in a condensed manner. Much as a reference for us while we take up on deliverables

With these classes, we are already looking at potential terms to be part of the Glossary under GSWG

Agreed, Kalin. I’ve already given Scott the feedback that defining these “credential classes” should be a Definition deliverable from the GSWG.

+1

Yes, IMHO there’s a huge role for “social credentials”

they won’t have high assurance, but they will be good enough for many use cases

so our role will be to simplify it to be more readable and approachable

+1 Victor

Great point, Karl. Usability and adoptability are huge concerns.

I think the Human Experience TF will have a big role in the adoptability

Government policies are very thorough and reach. I think to convince government to read that it has to be quite extensive

q+

Usability might be much bigger concern in the Class 1 Untrusted Credentials

Sorry guys - got to drop off - late for another meeting. Interesting conversation, I'll join in online on the wiki pages.

We need to keep a time check here