Page Comparison

...

1. New members
2. Review Riek's paper on Terminology and the Resolution of Related Issues - Rieks Joosten
   1. This paper started with ISO 27001 work on information security architecture and its glossary
   2. The purpose of terminology is an attempt to enable people to understand what other people actually mean—and to demonstrate that understanding
   3. It proposes practical, utilitarian tests for good terminology
   4. This underscores the purpose of "scopes"
   5. Quoting from the paper: "A Definition for ‘Definition"

      This leads us to propose that the phrase ‘definition (of a term)’ be used in scopes/contexts where it is an objective to realize the effects we described earlier, to refer to a specification of:

      • -  a scope, i.e. the context(s) within which the definition of that term is applicable. This includes or implies, implicitly or explicitly, that objectives exist that are pursued within that scope by one or more people (stakeholders);

      • -  a (set of) criteria, that stakeholders will use for judging whether or not something is an instance of the term;

      • -  a term, i.e. one or more words (e.g. ‘definition (of a term)’) that stakeholders can use within the scope to refer the things that satisfy the criteria.

        A definition qualifies as ‘good’ if and only if it has the following properties:

      • -  its criteria are well-formed, meaning that all stakeholders make the same judgements

        c.q. reach the same conclusions when using these criteria in a given situation;

      • -  it is relevant, i.e. stakeholders have identified cases that demonstrate how the use of

        this term helps them realize their objectives and/or address issues that prevent them from doing so, or they have agreed that relevance is obvious.

   6. What is important is not the term itself, but how it actually distinguishes from entities that are NOT described by the term
   7. The article includes a short glossary about the terms Rieks recommends using for defining terminology itself.
   8. Rieks will provide a link for the notes.
   9. Rieks also introduced the idea that this could be a ToIP white paper if the group is interested.
   10. Daniel Hardman supported that idea as it is good educational material for our efforts.
3. Discuss collaboration with the Sovrin Governance Framework Working Group (SGFWG) on V3.1 of the Sovrin Glossary
   1. line.kofoed explained that she is enthusiastic about evolving the Sovrin Glossary as part of the CTWG work.
      1. Scope is particularly important in the context of the Sovrin Glossary.
      2. This is a new perspective on the Sovrin Glossary, which has always assumed a certain scope.
      3. When the perspective on a scope changes—for example from the initial perspective of a ToIP Layer 1 utility network to a ToIP Layer 4 ecosystem—it changes the meaning of terms within that scope.
      4. Line is hoping that the CTWG could help guide the SGFWG in terms of defining the scope(s) it is working within.
      5. Rieks Joosten advised that the SGFWG Glossary group could define its scope(s) in terms of a set of objectives for a set of stakeholders—for example Governance
      6. Within that scope, it should be relatively straightforward to make the correct distinctions for terms as described in his paper. The group can concentrate on the meaning of a term inside that scope.
      7. Rieks is thinking that, for the Sovrin Foundation, there are several related scopes across which you might want to harmonize. That is mostly a matter of seeing if you are making the same distinctions in one group as are made in the other groups about a specific term.
      8. You may decide to then create a "superset scope" that crosses both previous scopes.
      9. The ultimate goal is shared understanding.
      10. Contributors can contribute criterion for the definition of terms—the actual term is just a suggestion; what is most important is the criteria.
      11. line.kofoed asked about the role of mental models, and how we can help contribute those to the glossary.
      12. Drummond Reed brought up the effectiveness of the "mental models" that feature in a number of terms in the eSSIF-Lab Glossary work and asked Rieks Joosten where he saw those fitting in the CTWG work.
      13. Rieks gave the analogy of how the Greeks used earth-centric concepts to describe the world. Then the shift in the frame of reference to the Sun being at the center of the universe—the Copernican Inversion—it made the concepts much easier. So it is a continual challenge to find the frame of reference that will provide the simplest explanation.
      14. Rieks gave the example of the Parties, Actions, and Actors mental model. The frame of reference is electronic transactions. The shift to parties, actions, and action is the "Copernican inversion" of the normal way of thinking about organizations and legal actions.
      15. There is no formula for how to discover such a frame of reference that simplifies that explanation. But when you find 
   2. Also: how to ingest/integrate the Good Health Pass Glossary now that it is into public review draft.
      1. Even though it is much younger than the Sovrin Glossary, this too needs the same evolutionary progression.
4. Discuss the use of the GitHub wiki capability for our proposed wiki "front-end"
   1. Daniel Hardman summarized that a GitHub wiki is written entirely in Markdown as a set of files in a folder as part of a GitHub repo. 
   2. This means that it is fully programmable and easily integrated into the overall GitHub-based design of the wiki.
   3. Drummond Reed shared that this opened up a very wide range of options for how to structure a wiki.
   4. Daniel Hardman  proposed the following:
      1. Set up a template for how to create a GitHub wiki for terminology that any group can use for its own repo for a deliverable.
      2. Modify the spec for the ToIP Term tool to prioritize the import function for that wiki.
      3. The wiki then becomes the "living" version of the data for that scope, and the corpus becomes the overall combined repository.
      4. Rieks Joosten clarified that each scope stakeholders group could use the wiki template.
   5. Drummond Reed volunteered to draft a new Confluence wiki page for a "Glossary Wiki User Manual".
   6. Daniel Hardman volunteered to:
      1. Update the spec for the ToIP Term tool to include support for GitHub-based Glossary Wikis
      2. Review the draft bounty for any revisions needed for support of GitHub-based Glossary Wikis
      3. Help Drummond with the "Glossary Wiki User Manual".
   7. Rieks Joosten volunteered to try a dry run of the "Glossary Wiki User Manual".
5. Review of Decisions and Action Items and planning Agenda items for next meeting: our goal with our next meeting is:
   1. Review the proposed "Glossary Wiki User Manual".
   2. Review the proposed revisions to the ToIP Term tool
   3. Review the proposed revisions to the bounty writeup
   4. Discuss the options for placing the bounty (and ideally make a final decision about placement)

Decisions

•  We The CTWG will proceed with defining how we will be using GitHub -based glossary wikis and integrating them with the ToIP Term tool

Action Items

•  Sample Action Item

•  Daniel Hardman: Update the spec for the ToIP Term tool to include support for GitHub-based Glossary Wikis
•  Daniel Hardman: Review the draft bounty for any revisions needed for support of GitHub-based Glossary Wikis
•  Drummond Reed Draft a new Confluence wiki page for a "Glossary Wiki User Manual"
•  Daniel Hardman: Provide feedback on Drummond's proposed draft "Glossary Wiki User Manual"
•  Rieks Joosten: Try a dry run of the "Glossary Wiki User Manual" (assuming Drummond and Daniel get it done early enough)