Time

Agenda Item

Lead

Notes

3 min

• Start recording

• Welcome & antitrust notice

• Introduction of new members

• 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

5 min

General announcements

All

Any news and updates of general interest to CTWG members

• @Rieks Joosten TNO is getting involved in some trajectories in healthcare and higher ed where people are asking how to deal with self-sovereign identity. TNO is advising them to join into an assurance community and start using the eSSIF-Lab mental models. The reception has been very good.

• @Rieks Joosten also shared that unfortunately the proposed eSSIF-Lab 2.0 project did not receive funding from the EU.

  • @Nicky Hickman brought up the possibility of TNO applying for funding from the Africa Global Gateway project ($1.5B euros over the net five years) and also the ED Digital Wallet Consortium project. 

  • Nicky is also starting to plan funding for the next stages of the Yoma project. She will send links to Rieks. 

• Rieks also shared that TNO has been working on QDX—qualified data exchange. This involves everything around the requirements and preparation for presentation requests. This reflects that the credential itself is not the entire value proposition, but rather the entire provenance of the data on the credential. For example, a personal name on a credential issued by the Dutch government has much more value than a personal name on another credential. And a credential from a bank is known to have been backed by KYC.

  • TNO is shifting its focus upwards from the technical level of credential exchange to the actual business value.

  • @Nicky Hickman talked about the difficulty of calculating the value delivered in such exchanges.

  • Rieks said that the project is focused on defining the requirements from the standpoint of the verifier. It may require quite a bit of work, but that is not the same thing as complexity.

  • Nicky asked if it requires a negotiation between the verifier and the issuer(s).

  • Rieks explained that the work is more focused on how to help the verifiers define their requirements.

2 min

Review of previous action items

Chairs

@Drummond Reed reported that neither of these is done yet, so he will carry them forward.

10 min

Status update

Chairs

We skipped our last meeting due to travel, so we'll start by catching up on current tasks.

• ACTION: @Nicky Hickman requests to have a ToIP terms wiki set up — @Drummond Reed will ask Daniel (and will mention the possibility of doing this via an UnSync meeting).

10 min

Request from GSWG

@Scott Perry

The GSWG has asked for for layer-specific glossary templates.

• Scott explained that the GSWG is developing layer-specific templates for all Controlled Documents in a governance framework for a specific layer.

• The one "missing template" is for a glossary.

• The goal is for it to fulfill the requirements of documents specified in the ToIP Governance Architecture Specification. 

• @Nicky Hickman does not feel that it requires a full task force, given that she went through the process with the Yoma glossary. But she agreed to help.

• Nicky showed the Yoma Glossary as an example of what she thinks is needed.

ACTION: @Nicky Hickman to propose a template glossary.

ACTION: @Drummond Reed volunteered to introduce some others from Avast who want to join in the CTWG work who could help with the template.

10 min

Market-facing terminology

@Drummond Reed

More requests for market-facing terminology are surfacing.

10 min

Proposal for UnSync meetings

@Daniel Hardman

See this Slack proposal from Daniel for us to switch to UnSync meetings.

• @Drummond Reed 

5 mins

• Review decisions/action items

• Planning for next meeting 

Chairs