APAC Meeting

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://lf-toip.atlassian.net/wiki/display/HOME/Calendar+of+ToIP+Meetings

Zoom Meeting Links / Recordings

https://zoom.us/rec/play/8kdfn-Be9UrHArw1xL6BzFUyld9Iwnk7vfuowoTW2LoRGGFMHYceo61J2s-PH-fYqVWOdqA0PN2xUrEe.KjS96MnQ6OyKTqob?autoplay=true&startTime=1688025657000

Note that the meeting starts 1m15s into the recording, and finishes at 29m46s - the remaining 20 minutes will let you see Jo type in the minutes below!

(Decided not to edit and upload a new version since that might be considered "fake" in these times of #GenAI)

Attendees

Agenda Items and Notes (including all relevant links)

Time	Agenda Item	Lead	Notes
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. New Members:
27 min	General discussion on the current focus areas	All	The consideration of Trust Registries (TRs), their use and governance appears to be of primary concern from the NA/EU call. JP reflected on the NA/EU meeting and how a rearticulation of the work to be done by the Governance Architecture Task Force (GATF) would be helpful. This might help contextualise the role of the group and save frustration building. JS pointed out that the topic of TRs is across a number of different ToIP groups and probably needs coordination. The topics seen in these discussions were: What's deemed to be a Root of Trust, what are the different types of RoTs and how does a verifier navigate these using TRs? How are TRs discoverable? How does the definition of Use Cases, the use of VCs for these and the rules about the use of the required claims JS suggested that if there is interest in TRs that members of the GATF should attend the Issuer Requirements or Trust Registry Protocol TFs. JP proposed 2 models for credential presentations - simple and complex. The simple model is one where the verifier decides that they are satisfied with the proof(s) provided by the holder without any further investigation. An "atomic" or at least a sequence of bilateral transactions that is resolved between the two parties alone. This works for low risk, low value transactions. The complex model is where the verifier needs to check more things, "background checks" if you like on the organisations who issued the claims presented by the holder for example - this is where the governance trust graph navigation comes in (and TRs come into play). The conversation also included considering how a verifier might know what they needed to ask, what would "suffice" as proof for their regulatory/licence conditions. The suggestion was that this was a problem already being solved in "the real world", to be licenced organisations they need to understand and demonstrate their adherence to regulations. The ToIP system might make these requirements "discoverable", but they have already been found and "encoded" by the time a holder presents their proof(s). JP suggested a continued extension of the step-wise mental model definition to continue to articulate these kinds of topics. This was agreed. File is available for comment here: https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1vYUJW76BEK_CQotAZ5maXYwe3H3K3dKCPAcTqEgfGJQ/edit?usp=sharing

	Topic #2
	Topic #3
	Topic #4
5 mins	Review decisions/action items Planning for next meeting	Chairs

Screenshots/Diagrams (numbered for reference in notes above)

Decisions

Further development of the simple mental model on governance is worth the effort.

Zoom Meeting Links / Recordings

Attendees

Agenda Items and Notes (including all relevant links)

Screenshots/Diagrams (numbered for reference in notes above)

Decisions

Action Items

Browser not supported