• 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:
  • Kyle Robinson has been in several other WGs. Kyle works on the Mines Digital Trust team for the government of British Columbia in Canada. Working with the Mining Association of Canada on ESG and carbon accounting.

Any news and updates of general interest to CTWG members

• Judith Fleenor announced that BC Gov and Open Earth Foundation will be the All-Member Meeting topic in April.
• Rieks Joosten said that within TNO they are working on two models:
  • Qualified data exchange: will specify within this model what verifiers/validators need to specify to get the data they need for decisions, and for others to be able to discover those requirements. Related to the International Data Spaces. Will be an umbrella for qualified data exchange.
  • TNO is trying to make a prototype to see if this can be implemented. Can a single party provide a description of their information need such that they can go to information directories or catalogues to get the necessary data. Will be implemented as a multi-party transaction platform. It will be a tool that allows verifiers/validators to phrase their presentation requests. This will answer the issue of how to know what data to request. The real value is not just in the data but in the assurances that come with the data.
  • Judith mentioned that this sounds like it might intersect with the Data Portability and Storage Task Force (within the Inputs and Semantics WG), as they are working on related topics.
  • Kyle asked if this was related to "data agreements". Rieks said it was different—eSSIF-Labs has over 60 sub-grantees in their program.

• ACTION: Drummond Reed and other volunteers to complete the "backfill" work of terms from the GSWG specifications that should be in the ToIP Core Glossary.
• ACTION: ALL INTERESTED CTWG MEMBERS to review this issue in the eSSIF-Lab repo to fully understand Rieks' proposal for terminology repos. Please post your feedback in the #concepts-terminology-wg Slack channel.

Discuss this Slack thread posted by Nicky (text copied below for convenience, including corrections made by Nicky):

For the terms/language themselves, I identified one area for some alignment / thought - around verifiable credentials and credentials.  In the end I had to go to W3C for these terms and and with eSSIF-Lab for issuer/holder/verifier. This was partly because there are other 'trust tasks' like token exchange in yoma and also because of use of other mental models and the different definitions that come through from W3C.  What you end up with (speaking as a linguist rather than as a terms specialist), is a kind of franglais the words are less important than the grammar.  

Discussion:

• Rieks explained that Nicky added the term "dope" to the Yoma glossary: https://github.com/trustoverip/yoma/wiki/dope
• Nicky explained that it was for alignment with Gen Z youth participants.
• Rieks said that the criteria should be something that the contributors agree would enable others to distinguish whether or not something met the criterion, i.e., if it was "dope".
• Rieks explained that Nicky was also exploring how much the Yoma community wanted to participate in terminology development. But the community members wanted to see pop-ups, which will require our next generation tooling.
• Kyle asked about our description of the terms wiki term template.
  • Rieks said he tries to always include the definition and purpose and examples as they make sense.
  • ACTION: Drummond Reed to propose how to evolve the Term Template so it is clear how to create terms wiki entries.

Discuss Rieks proposal for ToIP Term Tool V2 as reflected in this issue in the eSSIF-Lab repo.

• Rieks said that the key issue he ran into as we was trying to document our V1 tooling, the key issue was the difference between ingestion and curation.
• Ingestion is the input phase of terminology development. Curation is the harmonization/decision stage.
• Rieks said that ideally the curation stage will support the production of glossaries and dictionaries, and in addition it supports the tools that authors need to support producing their documents with glossary links for terms and popups.
• Daniel Hardman is supportive of doing a more ambitious usage of the ToIP Term Tooling, however he's more inclined to build on the V1 tooling. The eSSIF-Lab tooling is more sophisticated.
  • He explained how the current V1 tooling could be adjusted to only output new versions of an associated glossary only when the terms community chooses, OR static glossaries can be easily created by saving and naming a "frozen" version of a glossary.
• Kyle asked a good question about whether a terms community would want a living glossary, or a frozen or versioned glossary. Drummond said both can be needed and it depends on the author's requirements.
• In terms of V2, Rieks said that one of the features on his list is more curation tools, but that those would require a little more familiarity with Markdown documents.
  • He gave an example of a YAML header on a Markdown file (see screenshot #1 below).
  • These are key-value pairs that help the tooling process the Markdown file.
  • What he would like to see in V2 is that we can add new tools as we need them.
  • His first preference is one that makes static documentation.
  • The second one would be for generating glossaries.
  • The eSSIF-Lab issue referenced above is a proposal for a fixed directory structure for a terms repo that could be adopted by any participating repo.
• ACTION: Rieks Joosten to continue to develop his proposal for ToIP Term Tool V2.

Next meeting:

• ACTION: Drummond Reed  to add to the next meeting agenda to see if Nicky Hickman has any other feedback from her Yoma glossary work.