Versions Compared

Old Version 1

changes.mady.by.user John Phillips

Saved on

compared with

New Version Current

changes.mady.by.user John Phillips

Saved on

Key

  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.

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 (Feb 2023) 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://wikilf-toip.trustoveripatlassian.orgnet/wiki/display/HOME/Calendar+of+ToIP+Meetings

Zoom Meeting Links / Recordings

Meeting proper starts around 5 minutes in

Zoom Link:

https://zoom.us/rec/share/WUB--I_QuYtyO3lwnH2BAK7ORvidD6HuMK2E2H0QO6hbE1T4tkdPIaIsZZ9bSYwx.NyV_2N1HCLLhAlEsue0aAiAOOacv8Y1f1Ee3QBgbiNPxuooOujDY97lN6stLybpRbJm60_hJwkEeRHoe.B5bmiG-jAIZqFuz5

Audio Transcript Link: 

https://zoom.us/rec/share/Yix_OkpzF2JwlTu-q2oXTn1N9zTuCEE_DX7MOchXMP6TRjtUrh9l-s-7DNtZ3CTW.tsCXpsyT9PVGdjid

...

TimeAgenda ItemLeadNotes
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.
2 minReview of previous action itemsChairs

Topic #1Sankarshan, Keerthi and John reviewed the earlier Americas meeting discussion and considered ways to progress the GATF governance architecture discussion.
One observation/suggestion was that we should make sure that all representations are grounded on and/or make use of the most recent definition of the 4 layers that the TSWG are using as the scaffold for their diagrams (there are subtle but important wording changes between the V2 layer descriptions and the V3)		Topic #2

The group also discussed the importance of use-cases and the risk of over-reliance on any single / specific instances of use cases in testing/defining the architecture. In other words, we shouldn't assume that just because the governance of one trust ecosystem demands a certain specific consideration, all trust ecosystems demand the same consideration.

In addition, the group suggested the ToIP's role was to allow the authentic (trustworthy) representation of existing governance structures, rather than to define new ones over old. This was with reference to existing systems that have existing governance models where the new element is the issuance and verification of credentials, but "nothing else" is changing. Here the VC is an "and" to the existing governance and issuance process, it doesn't change the right/duties/responsibilities of parties other than to consider how the govern the VC representation of an existing, likely physical, credential.

ChatGPT sourced summary:

  1. John provides an overview of a recent meeting, mentioning attendees like Scott Perry, Karlie, Neil Thompson, and Judith Fleena. He discusses a request from Drummond to propose a new release for the Trusted ROP diagram.

  2. John elaborates on the development of a proposal for the Trust over IP (ToIP) third-generation diagram. He emphasizes that the front page cover of ToIP is not an architecture but a representation scheme with different purposes.

  3. The discussion also covers the need for different types of stakeholders to understand ToIP and the necessity of guiding them through various aspects like governance, technology, and verifiable credentials.

  4. John and Sankarshan Mukhopadhyay discuss the importance of having a non-dogmatic approach to ToIP diagrams and the significance of them being guides rather than strict specifications.

  5. They also touch on the need for a design language for Trust over IP, including colors, fonts, and accessibility considerations.

  6. The conversation ends with John suggesting the use of Draw.io for diagram creation and an acknowledgement of the need to present content effectively, not just through presentations but also on web pages.

Indicative Actions (extracted by ChatGPT from the transcript)

  1. John Phillips:

    • To create minutes from the previous meeting.
    • To share the link to the Trust over IP diagram in the chat for reference.
    • To clarify the distinction between the cover page diagram and architecture in Trust over IP.
    • To consider how to represent layers and elements in the ToIP third-generation diagram.
    • To work on the proposal for the ToIP third-generation diagram and share it with stakeholders.
    • To review the brand guidelines for Trustee and consider aspects of design language and accessibility.
    • To explore the use of Draw.io for creating diagrams.

  2. Sankarshan Mukhopadhyay:

    • To watch the meeting recording and share his feedback.
    • To review the proposal by John Phillips and consider the possibility of unanimous agreement.

  3. General:

    • The team needs to decide on a word that is neutral enough for describing the Trust over IP diagrams.
    • Consideration of different stakeholders and how they navigate through the diagrams and discussions.
    • Ensuring that the design language and diagrammatic representations are accessible to a wide range of audiences, including those with color blindness.

Topic #2



Topic #3


Topic #4



Topic #5


5 mins
  • Review decisions/action items
  • Planning for next meeting 
Chairs


...