This TF schedules meetings as needed. Each meeting will be announced on the GSWG mailing list and the #governance-architecture-tf Slack channel.

The current cadence is that there are two GATF meetings every two weeks:

Wednesday at 7pm EST/4pm PDT/Thursday 9am AEST
Zoom: https://zoom.us/j/94290110805?pwd=OEVhd2IwUUxTblNtYUNOVEtGaUNBUT09

Thursday at 6pm AEST/10am CEST/3pm GMT+7h
https://zoom.us/j/97765626957?pwd=L2RFRmczTlpoWS9RQkhwaUdjaVpHdz09

The meetings (and Zoom links) are available on the ToIP meeting calendar
https://lf-toip.atlassian.net/wiki/display/HOME/Calendar+of+ToIP+Meetings

Zoom Meeting Links / Recordings

Video Link: https://zoom.us/rec/share/kbfcFTfXOFm4Tw93Xb7QeYzlL2Y50dTRsCoQA_ekBMec5olW40elO1e7ZkwYjChe.h5rh4PTMiMc8ppTt

Attendees

Agenda Items and Notes (including all relevant links)

Time	Agenda Item	Lead	Notes
3 min	Start recording Welcome & antitrust notice New member introductions Agenda review	Chairs	Antitrust Policy Notice: Attendees are reminded to adhere to the meeting agenda and not participate in activities prohibited under antitrust and competition laws. Only members of ToIP who have signed the necessary agreements are permitted to participate in this activity beyond an observer role. New Members: None
2 min	Review of previous action items	Chairs	Agenda: Review actions discussed during previous meeting Attraction Pass Task Force Ecosystem Foundry Response to Trust Canvas How do we address multiple governance frameworks in the same ecosystem, example context might be new canvas diagram Do we have a basic definition for Governance that people will understand? Can we use the diagram to explain?
	Topic #1		Previously Discussed Actions: Further Exploration of Binding and Transferability: The discussion highlighted the need for more in-depth exploration into the binding of tickets to individuals and the transferability of passes. This involves understanding the legal and governance aspects of reissuing tickets and ensuring the authenticity and rightful ownership of passes. Status: Neil (and others) looking at this. Formal Risk Assessment for Attraction Pass Task Force: Neil Thomson suggested conducting a formal risk assessment to better understand the risks involved in the attraction pass industry and how SSI principles could address these challenges. Status: Neil (and others) looking at this. Utilization of Trust over IP Canvas: The group agreed on the utility of the Trust over IP canvas, developed by John Phillips, as a tool for mapping out and understanding the components of the Trust over IP framework. This tool could be used both within the Trust over IP Foundation working groups and by external parties designing their ecosystems. Status: ? Engagement with Human Experience Working Group: Carly Huitema expressed interest in engaging with the Human Experience Working Group to discuss how human-centric design principles can be incorporated into the Trust over IP framework and its applications. Status: Carly has reached out and is awaiting a response The group worked through the action items and the agenda. A summary of the transcript generated by ChatGPT is provided below.
	Topic #2		Key Points and Contributors: Travel Plans and Attendance: Initial discussion revolved around personal travel plans and attendance at upcoming events, with contributions from Dan Bachenheimer, Neil Thomson, and Carly Huitema discussing their schedules and intentions regarding IW (identified as a key event). Discussion on Governance and Economics: The meeting delved into how governance and economics intertwine within ecosystems, addressing concerns raised in the EFWG (Ecosystem Foundry Working Group) about financial viability. Carly Huitema and Drummond Reed highlighted the importance of economics in the trust canvas, acknowledging it as a crucial but challenging aspect to integrate. Attraction Pass Industry: Neil Thomson brought up economic aspects and operational risks in the Attraction Pass industry, emphasizing the integration of revenue collection with pass issuance and distribution. This highlighted a specific industry case where governance and economics significantly overlap. Ecosystems and Governance Models: The discussion underscored the complexity of ecosystems and governance models, suggesting that an ecosystem could operate under multiple governance frameworks. Examples included the EU's digital identity framework, where overarching EU regulations coexist with individual member states' governance. Machine Readable Governance: The concept of machine-readable governance was debated, with Neil Thomson describing it as akin to configuration files. The group acknowledged the potential of moving towards rules engines but recognized the need to start with foundational elements first. Interoperability and Trust Registries: Carly Huitema discussed the necessity of a reputation system to connect trust registries, enabling users to navigate and verify trust across different registries. This led to a broader conversation about ensuring interoperability and trust across diverse ecosystems. Agreed Actions: Exploration of Economics in Governance: The group agreed on the importance of incorporating economic considerations into governance models, recognizing it as a vital component for sustainable ecosystems. This includes examining business models, revenue flows, and the financial viability of governance structures. Further Discussion on Machine Readable Governance: There was consensus on the potential benefits of developing machine-readable governance, albeit recognizing the challenges and the need for gradual progression towards more sophisticated implementations. Engagement with Human Experience Working Group: Carly Huitema will continue to engage with the Human Experience Working Group to integrate considerations around navigating trust registries and enhancing user experience in verifying trust across ecosystems. Documentation and Framework Development: Participants are encouraged to contribute to ongoing documentation efforts and framework development, particularly in areas concerning the integration of economics into governance models and exploring machine-readable governance mechanisms. Conclusion: The meeting highlighted the interplay between governance, economics, and technology within ecosystems, emphasizing the need for a holistic approach to developing sustainable and trustable digital environments. While recognizing the challenges in integrating these components, the group identified specific areas for further exploration and action, including the economic underpinnings of governance models and the advancement towards machine-readable governance to facilitate interoperability and trust verification across diverse ecosystems.
	Topic #3
	Topic #4
5 mins	Review decisions/action items Planning for next meeting	Chairs

Screenshots/Diagrams (numbered for reference in notes above)

Chat notes

00:07:23 Carly Huitema: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1L4PNNd1FrVTGfiKZpRl6VMNSGkSm8ul2qk_k4xd7HYE/edit#heading=h.emwkxm6kzpe3
00:12:13 John Phillips: https://lf-toip.atlassian.net/wiki/display/HOME/2024-02-21+GATF+Meeting+Notes+-+Americas
00:13:43 Carly Huitema: Reacted to "https://wiki.trustov..." with 👍
00:17:59 sankarshan mukhopadhyay: It is not necessarily a governance architecture issue however one aspect of Attraction Pass which came up in the “silly use case” Neil describes is the pure offline flow (holder and verifier are both offline) which paper does reasonably well, but not so in our mental model right now.
00:20:27 Carly Huitema: ohhh economics. that's important I think for a trust canvas, and addresses a concern we've heard again and again in EFWG (how to make it make financial sense).
00:21:16 Carly Huitema: But also out of scope for the experiences of many people in ToIP. We are stretching with the addition of governance to tech and next economics
00:22:00 Carly Huitema: (now I see the ToIP span of control on the tech and gov and not including economics).
00:22:10 sankarshan mukhopadhyay: My instinct is that the business model stack as Drummond states it means that the economic model column is likely a pair with the Ecosystem one. This ensures that the base level of Tech+Governance forms the underlying basis for overlays (like how you can do with Maps)
00:22:21 Carly Huitema: Reacted to "My instinct is that ..." with 👍
00:22:36 Carly Huitema: Economics usually concerns the individual pieces.
00:23:46 Carly Huitema: each individual part of the ecosystem will have their own business concerns/incentives/ways to be profitable.
00:24:25 Drummond Reed: Yes, Carly. Jamie Smith’s point was the each component within an ecosystem may have its own business incentives/models.
00:25:44 Drummond Reed: I love the ecosystem biology analogy!
00:26:32 sankarshan mukhopadhyay: Replying to "Economics usually co…"
There is a fair bit of this covered in the Sovrin Ecosystem Governance Framework document. Where the premise is that while entities in the ecosystem could be in competition but they are also required to collaborate to ensure that the entire ecosystem can be sustainable, viable and grows.
00:26:56 Neil Thomson: There are certainly economic aspects to the Attraction Pass industry - in that revenue collection and flows are integrated with Pass issuance and distribution.
00:32:38 Carly Huitema: But when designing things, the economics is going to play into the design of governance.
00:32:47 Drummond Reed: Reacted to "But when designing t..." with 👍
00:33:49 sankarshan mukhopadhyay: Replying to "But when designing t…"
Economics is certainly one of the major influences in managing the risks inherent and how the requirements and policies end up shaping the final version of governance.
00:34:09 Carly Huitema: How is this separated (or not) into setup vs operations?
00:35:04 sankarshan mukhopadhyay: Replying to "How is this separate…"
Will not economics be both setup (building the network and ecosystem) and operations (keeping the lights on for the ecosystem to find paths to grow)?
00:35:17 Drummond Reed: Section 2.5 of the ToIP Governance Metamodel Specification is entitled “Business Requirements”. https://trustoverip.org/permalink/ToIP-Governance-Metamodel-Specification-V1.0-2022-12-21.pdf
00:35:35 Carly Huitema: Replying to "How is this separate..."

yes, but at the beginning is the exploration as you try out different ones before settling on the operations.
00:35:57 Drummond Reed: Replying to "How is this separate..."

Yes, absolutely, Sankarshan. So Andy Tobin and others have also said that we need to consider an Operations stack.
00:36:03 Kyle Robinson: Replying to "Section 2.5 of the T..."

"1. SHOULD clearly explain any exchange(s) of value between trust community members governed by the GF."
00:36:10 sankarshan mukhopadhyay: Replying to "How is this separate…"
Aha! @Carly Huitema thank you!
00:36:12 John Phillips: It seems reasonable for many governance frameworks need to consider onboarding / accreditation processes for parties, and they should also describe how they are maintained - how changes are agreed, and even (future thinking) how they can be closed, how they "end".
00:36:44 Drummond Reed: Reacted to "It seems reasonable ..." with 👍
00:36:47 sankarshan mukhopadhyay: Reacted to "It seems reasonable …" with 👍
00:36:54 Drummond Reed: Replying to "It seems reasonable ..."

Another vote for an Operations stack.
00:37:50 Carly Huitema: Replying to "It seems reasonable ..."

the EFWG can work as a guide, getting people to think about components and context etc., mapping it into the stack and discovering lack of profitability etc. and go back again to changing the context and components.
00:37:55 Drummond Reed: Both Business Rules and Operational Policies need to be governed.
00:38:10 Neil Thomson: Replying to "It seems reasonable ..."

+1 - including operations risks...

Operations for Passes, includes distribution, which is tied to revenue collection
00:39:54 Neil Thomson: As Dan points out - is their a fee for each VC, Pass issuance or any verification?
00:40:15 Drummond Reed: Replying to "As Dan points out - ..."

Depends on the ecosystem and its business model
00:40:41 Jo Spencer: I like this discussion - it's a particular angle (economics and value exchange) over the top of the whole picture and I don't see it as a specific vertical - each ecosystem will have it's own commercial model and value exchange rules. The value exchange that underpins the trust solutions needs to be part of the Governance Model (and Target Operation Model).
00:41:13 Neil Thomson: Replying to "As Dan points out - ..."

As Dan says, someone has to pay the cost of the SSI infrastructure, with the assumption that it's lower cost than the alternative, but is a new mechanism/service.
00:41:26 Drummond Reed: Reacted to "As Dan says, someone..." with 👍
00:41:38 Carly Huitema: In the ecosystem then you put yourself in the context of everything else that is operating
00:42:56 sankarshan mukhopadhyay: Replying to "I like this discussi…"
in some contexts the business and operations context might end up rethinking the Technical and Governance parts in a manner which suits the needs of the ecosystems.
00:43:16 Neil Thomson: Monty Python Fish Slap Dance Skit

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VTATqtDUbZ0
00:43:23 Kyle Robinson: I think at latest count, our Energy and Mines Ecosystem has 20 GF Frameworks - yes, twenty
00:43:56 Carly Huitema: But you might find some ecosystems to be more profitable for you than others
00:44:20 Carly Huitema: Replying to "But you might find s..."

e.g. better food from agriculture, but then need to pay attention to wilderness because of disease crossover etc.
00:45:30 Drummond Reed: Reacted to "In the ecosystem the..." with 🙏
00:45:51 Drummond Reed: Reacted to "I like this discussi..." with 👍
00:46:17 Drummond Reed: Reacted to "Monty Python Fish Sl..." with 🤣
00:46:33 Drummond Reed: Replying to "I think at latest co..."

WOW!!!!!!!!!
00:46:45 Jo Spencer: Reacted to "I like this discussi..." with 👍
00:47:05 Carly Huitema: Reacted to "I think at latest co..." with 😮
00:47:09 Drummond Reed: I love that term. Let’s change our name to the Truth over IP Foundation!
00:47:27 Jo Spencer: Reacted to "in some contexts the..." with 👍
00:47:39 John Phillips: That's a bold reach - too many people claiming truth on their side at the moment...
00:47:47 Drummond Reed: Reacted to "That's a bold reach ..." with 🤣
00:47:55 Jo Spencer: Reacted to "I think at latest co..." with 😯
00:48:07 Drummond Reed: Replying to "I love that term. Le..."

Trust is indeed rooted in truth at some level.
00:48:34 sankarshan mukhopadhyay: Replying to "That's a bold reach …"
Only Chuthulu has the truth ;)
00:48:46 Drummond Reed: Reacted to "Only Chuthulu has th..." with 🤩
00:48:50 Neil Thomson: Replying to "That's a bold reach ..."

👆
00:49:06 Carly Huitema: Reacted to "Only Chuthulu has th..." with 👍
00:49:28 Drummond Reed: Digital credentials are the muon particles of digital trust ecosystems. People will want to use them across ecosystems indiscriminately.
00:49:40 Carly Huitema: Reacted to "Digital credentials ..." with 👍
00:49:50 Jo Spencer: Reacted to "That's a bold reach ..." with 👍
00:50:12 Jo Spencer: Reacted to "Only Chuthulu has th..." with ❤️
00:52:30 Drummond Reed: I love that Dundee Mifflin made Kyle’s diagram!!!!!!!!
00:52:48 Dan Bachenheimer: and Faber College
00:53:28 Dan Bachenheimer: and Acme (a la Road Runner)
00:58:10 Neil Thomson: Machine readable governance - newspeak for configuration files
00:58:22 Carly Huitema: Reacted to "Machine readable gov..." with 👍
00:58:24 sankarshan mukhopadhyay: Reacted to "Machine readable gov…" with 👍
00:58:26 Drummond Reed: Replying to "Machine readable gov..."

In large part, agree
00:58:58 Drummond Reed: Replying to "Machine readable gov..."

I do believe it will be reasonable to move into the rules engine space, but that’s walking and right now we need to crawl first.
00:59:11 John Phillips: Reacted to "I do believe it will..." with 👍
00:59:15 Carly Huitema: Reacted to "I do believe it will..." with 👍
00:59:17 sankarshan mukhopadhyay: Great conversation today - as always. Thank you. I’ll have to drop off now. @John Phillips if you are planning to be at the other version of this meeting today, please tag me on Slack and I’ll join.
01:01:16 Neil Thomson: TR intertrust - sounds like telecom exchange transparency - the user should never need to know it's not a single system.
01:01:37 Scott Perry: I have to go.
01:02:08 Neil Thomson: Replying to "TR intertrust - soun..."

That's where a common protocol for trust is "table stakes"
01:04:18 Neil Thomson: Have to drop....
01:04:52 Carly Huitema: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1kFeti37GjfoclRtJsiRwPG10-6zoZ7kQ9AiPkytX7r4/edit#heading=h.1059kkeqxc2r

Zoom Meeting Links / Recordings

Attendees

Agenda Items and Notes (including all relevant links)

Previously Discussed Actions:

Key Points and Contributors:

Agreed Actions:

Conclusion:

Screenshots/Diagrams (numbered for reference in notes above)

Chat notes

Decisions

Action Items

Browser not supported