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

The meetings (and Zoom links) are available on the ToIP meeting calendar:
LFX Meetings

Zoom Meeting Links / Recordings

Video and Transcript: Video Conferencing, Web Conferencing, Webinars, Screen Sharing

Attendees

@John Phillips

@Jo Spencer

@sankarshan

@Neil Thomson

Agenda Items and Notes (including all relevant links)

Summary of meeting:

Summary of meeting generated by NotebookLM from the transcript and chat messages…

The meeting involved John Phillips (Sezoo), Neil Thomson (QueryVision), sankarshan mukhopadhyay (Dhiway Networks Private Limited), and Jo Spencer (Sezoo) . The discussion centred around the governance of digital identity and verifiable credentials, drawing on the experience of working with the New South Wales (NSW) government.

Key contributions by attendees:

• John Phillips (Sezoo) initiated the meeting by reading out the antitrust policy. He explained the work done with the NSW government on a governance framework for their digital identity and verifiable credentials program. He highlighted the charter's focus on trustworthy interactions across independent ecosystems and cross-ecosystem governance. He sought feedback on presenting the NSW example. John addressed Neil's observation about the role of holders in cross-ecosystem trust. He clarified that the work on the NSW governance framework was a collaborative effort. He noted the absence of a holder requirements document, unlike the issuer requirements specification. John referenced the eIDAS framework and its efforts to define requirements for wallets. He used the example of his digital driving license from Victoria being presented in New Zealand to illustrate cross-ecosystem governance and the potential interest of verifiers in wallet governance. John emphasized that the charter is a changeable document. He highlighted the drift towards governments issuing certified identifiers, potentially sidestepping the issue of holders proving control of their own identifiers. John pointed out that digital identity wasn't legally recognised in Australia until the recent Digital ID bill. He then proceeded to share the work done with the NSW government, explaining their approach using the Trust over IP metamodel. He discussed the complexity of governance even within a single state like NSW, with multiple government authorities. He illustrated this with the example of issuing a first aid certificate. John explained how each credential has its own lifecycle. He went through various aspects of the governance framework considered for NSW, including terminology, localization, authority, administering authority, purpose, scope, objectives, general requirements, revisions, and extensions. He noted that the metamodel allows the recognition of other governing frameworks. John discussed the glossary and the challenges of maintaining consistent definitions across ecosystems. He also touched on risk assessment, trust assurance, certification, government requirements, and business requirements, including the sustainability of the governance framework. He mentioned the challenge of determining which minister would be responsible for the governance framework. John briefly covered technical requirements, information trust, legal agreements, holder governance, issuer requirements, verifier requirements, credentials, wallets, agents, applications, and the alignment of physical and digital credentials. He promised to seek confirmation for releasing the NSW governance framework document. John reacted with laughter to the initial formal reading of the antitrust policy. He replied to Neil's question about NSW's definition of digital identity by discussing the legal and practical perspectives, referencing the Australian Digital ID bill. He agreed with Neil on the usefulness of use cases . John proposed creating a Wiki page for example use cases related to the four deliverables . He clarified the nature of the Wiki page . He suggested linking use cases to specific deliverables . John also provided context to Jo's response regarding New South Wales' definition of digital identity .

• Neil Thomson (QueryVision) observed the absence of discussion around holders in the context of cross-ecosystem trust. He questioned the mechanisms for holders to prove their identity and control of credentials across different ecosystems. Neil agreed that considering the holder is necessary when discussing verifiers and cross-ecosystem governance. He confirmed that there was an intent to create a holder requirements document. Neil noted the trend of governments issuing certified government identifiers. He agreed with John on the possibility of mutual recognition between ecosystems with good governance. Neil concurred with the assessment of risk assessment being a medium effort due to existing government processes. He raised points about holders potentially paying for secure wallets and the role of biometric binding. Neil asked what NSW considers to be digital identity. He reacted with laughter to Sankarshan's comment about the antitrust policy reading. He agreed that use cases might assist . Neil supported the idea of creating a shared document for use cases . He suggested one-line statements for use cases and mapping them to the four deliverables .

• sankarshan mukhopadhyay (Dhiway Networks Private Limited) made a lighthearted comment about the formal antitrust policy reading. He highlighted the point that holders receiving credentials may not know their confidence or assurance level, while verifiers have mechanisms to determine trust. He suggested that holders don't have much influence in determining the outcome of presenting credentials. Sankarshan inquired about increasing the magnification of the shared document. He agreed that digital foundational IDs require sustainable funding models after initial philanthropic or World Bank support ends. He mentioned that birth, death, and marriage certificates are paid for in India. He noted that this could be a barrier for economically weaker sections, addressed by government subsidies. Sankarshan recalled the responsibilities of a passport holder as an example of defining holder responsibilities. He suggested critically examining the completeness of the Metamodel regarding cross-ecosystem exchange, noting its age.

• Jo Spencer (Sezoo) highlighted that NSW has existing administrative policies and governing frameworks that the digital credential system needed to fit into. He agreed with the optimism being potentially overstated regarding the ease of communicating the purpose of the governance framework. Jo noted that the NSW government ended up facing legal and legislative challenges due to not fully considering the governance framework early on. He discussed the sustainability challenge, particularly regarding pricing models for digital versions of documents like birth certificates. He pointed out the potential for digital credentials to cannibalize existing revenue streams. Jo emphasised the two models for sustainability: the ecosystem of credentials and the cost of governance. He agreed that the NSW government needed to do serious thinking and make decisions about governance. Jo mentioned the NSW government's initial focus on a proof of concept. He shared a realization that establishing a verifiable credential ecosystem might ideally avoid or minimise touching the complicated digital identity space. Jo highlighted the shift from a program build process to a run process and the lack of framework guidance on this. He presented diagrams illustrating the multiple layers of governance involved. Jo explained that the complexity of the governance thinking likely overwhelmed the NSW government. He clarified to Neil that NSW considers the digital identity to be the user's credentials or record within the NSW government systems. He agreed that each agency often has different records for individuals, adding to the complexity.

Actions Agreed:

• John Phillips agreed to take action to get confirmation about the possibility of releasing the NSW governance framework document publicly.

• John Phillips will add a section to the current document or create a new Wiki page to collect example use cases relevant to the four deliverables outlined in the charter. This page will welcome contributions and edits from the group .

• The use cases will include a note on which of the four deliverables they address to ensure coverage.

Chat notes

00:06:13 sankarshan mukhopadhyay (Dhiway Networks Private Limited): This is probably the first time in many years that a dramatic reading of that policy has happened 😄 Good work.
00:06:48 Neil Thomson (QueryVision): Reacted to "This is probably the..." with 😂
00:41:46 sankarshan mukhopadhyay (Dhiway Networks Private Limited): In India we pay for birth, death and marriage certificates (new, duplicate etc)
00:42:37 Jo Spencer (Sezoo): Interesting - does this put in place a barrier to their use?
00:43:28 sankarshan mukhopadhyay (Dhiway Networks Private Limited): Replying to "Interesting - does t..."

For economically weaker sections it does present a barrier. Government initiatives tend to address that via subsidising etc
00:49:55 sankarshan mukhopadhyay (Dhiway Networks Private Limited): Off-hand the one kind of document where I remember reading responsibilities of the Holder was the passport. It has a section which clearly mentions that the holder of the passport will do things like (a) immediately report a theft (b) take care against mutilation (c) present it when asked at a port of entry and so on. I had always thought those requirements stemmed from some legal precedent and were the “the drink is hot” kind of coffee cup warning.
00:55:47 Neil Thomson (QueryVision): What does NSW consider to be Digital Identity - a DID/Identifier? a VC or VC like signed "thing" that assigns an Entity an "Identity"
00:58:55 sankarshan mukhopadhyay (Dhiway Networks Private Limited): I think we should critically examine the completeness of the Metamodel in terms of item (2) in the charter
01:00:07 sankarshan mukhopadhyay (Dhiway Networks Private Limited): We have to remember that the Metamodel document is now around 20 months old. In the meantime there have been practical deployments of ecosystems with specific focus on enabling cross-ecosystem-border exchange.
01:03:49 John Phillips (Sezoo): Reacted to "This is probably the..." with 😂
01:04:05 John Phillips (Sezoo): Reacted to "We have to remember ..." with 👍
01:06:50 John Phillips (Sezoo): Replying to "What does NSW consid..."

https://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/search/display/display.w3p;query=Id:"legislation/bills/s1404_aspassed/0000"