Alex shared the "Trust over IP (ToIP) Governance Architecture Methodology" Google Doc (here), and took the attendees through a discussion of a proposed document structure for deliverables of the GATF.

(Prior to the meeting, John Phillips had suggested that the content being developed by participants in GATF was broader than a single document and might be easier to work with and understand as a collection of related documents.)

The proposed structure had been added as content to the existing. The proposed structure (for discussion) was:

1. ToIP Governance - an introduction
1. What this document covers and does not. Maybe link others in the Appendix that are peripherally relevant.
2. ToIP Governance - Governance implementation guide for designers, builders, operators and governors of ToIP systems
3. ToIP Governance - Requirements (components of the stack), audits and check-lists for Governance assurance
4. ToIP Governance Use Cases: Worked examples of Governance and how it applies, and is applied to, ToIP systems
5. Finally perhaps we need a "ToIP Governance for Dummies"
6. Appendix
1. Links to other documents that are relevant or might be helpful
   

(JP explained that point 5 was at least partly offered in jest, but that it would be useful to have a simple guide.)

The attendees considered how the proposed list might be improved/changed. 

The approach discussed was to maintain the current document hyperlink as the initial Google Doc to navigate to (since this link has been shared widely), and for the content of this document to link to the other documents and/or chapters that form the deliverables that the GATF are working on.

Savita Farooqui and Scott Perry took the attendees through their collaborative work on a comparison of the IEEE Blockchain Governance approach and the ToIP Governance approach. 

Google Doc Link:

They explained that the content explaining the IEEE governance model and comparing it with ToIP had yet to be added (most of the current content explores the ToIP model)

Savita Farooqui  commented that working on the document had enabled insights into the general requirements for trust systems and that these insights should find their way into the TF deliverables.

Savita Farooqui shared on screen another Google Doc (ref?) that provided an explanation of the IEEE approach to blockchain governance, including the "4P+I" mental model.

AT commented that the content and ideas being shared appeared very useful.

JP confirmed that the intent (to be realised) was to "integrate the ideas from the IEEE governance framework and the ToIP governance Metamodel to provide practical guidance for ToIP ecosystem governance design" so there was a "difference" and "merge" process anticipated.

The document contains a detailed elaboration of the Museum Pass Use Case, the content of which can (should) contribute to the proposed ToIP Governance Use Cases document.

The attendees discussed the difference between the management and operation of a system and the governance of a system. Scott Perry offered that in his professional experience there is a clear (and useful) distinction of these two functions. 

The attendees recognised that there are different requirements of governance and governance thinking during an instance of a ToIP system design, build and operate phases.