Rieks Joosten
Drummond Reed
line.kofoed

• Rieks is seeking feedback on the eSSIF-Lab concept behind the term Trust.
  • Scott Perry has provided comments that Rieks has incorporated.
• The Governance Stack WG and other volunteers working on the Design Principles for the ToIP Stack are also working on "trust principles".
• The Sovrin Governance Framework Working Group is evaluating how it will evolve the Sovrin Glossary.
• Since the topic keeps coming up, should we start doing more work on "mental models" such as the formal models that eSSIF-Labs has defined (e.g., the Parties, Actors and Actions model)?
  • Drummond asked Rieks how many of these mental models he expects that the ToIP universe may end out needing.
  • Rieks' answer was: "as many as turn out to be needed". It's not the number so much, but the quality of each of the models. They also tend to overlap with each other to some extent.
  • In Rieks' view, a mental model should represent "doing the hard work so the rest becomes easy". So a very good mental model is hard work, but it will make use of the terms much easier.
  • Drummond's guess is that in the ToIP universe, we will end out with roughly a dozen of these core mental models.
  • Rieks' suggested the idea that we start a Mental Models Task Force with a charter. It should reflect the needs of the different potential stakeholder groups. If we have two or three such stakeholders, that would help us draft a charter.
  • ACTION: Drummond Reed and Rieks Joosten to pursue the necessary feedback to decide about drafting a charter for a Mental Models Task Force.

• See diagram #1 below. The questions below were posed by Drummond Reed to test his understanding of our proposed terms wiki/glossary architecture as depicted by diagram #1.
• Is each version of a glossary published in the same repo as its "home" terms wiki?
  • Daniel Hardman: It is an option, not a requirement.
  • Rieks Joosten Each terms wiki could have a default glossary, which would contain all and only the terms defined in that terms wiki.
  • ACTION: Drummond Reed to revise Diagram #1 to include "Glossary E" with no underlying terms wiki.
• Is each version of a glossary a snapshot of the terms from an arbitrary set of terms wikis?
  • Daniel Hardman Yes.
• Does the license for each term "follow the term" into the glossaries it may be included in?
  • Daniel Hardman: a term cannot be copyrighted, but the definition can.
  • The terms template includes sourcing for the definition.
  • If you are sourcing from a source that has a license that the terms wiki tool recognizes, then that license will be cited.
• Can an author permalink to a particular definition of a term in a particular glossary? And if so, does that remain true even if there are multiple definitions of that term (from multiple terms wikis) in the same glossary?
  • Daniel Hardman is thinking of two types of permalinks:
    1. to terms in a terms wiki
    2. to terms defined in a glossary
  • The first type of permalink (to a terms wiki) should be defined clearly in our specifications and be very easy for a document author to do.
  • The second type of permalink (to a glossary) can be done any way the author and publishers wish to implement. 
  • The CTWG COULD prescribe one standard way to publish a glossary as an HTML page based on GitHub Pages. Then document authors could create permalinks following a specific convention that we would document.
  • Rieks Joosten added that it is up to the author of the paper to decide how to format its references.
    • In most cases, he believes authors will want static links to glossaries that are incorporated into the paper itself.
    • Exploring other definitions of the same term is interesting but secondary.
• Daniel Hardman clarified that a party can create a glossary without having to maintain their own terms wiki.
  • The governing party can select terms from any set of terms wikis. The glossary can be published wherever it is needed. It could be included inside another document (such as a spec.)
• Drummond Reed proposes that term we use the party governing a terms wiki be "governing party" (the same term the Governance Stack WG uses for the party responsible for a governance framework).
• Nicky Hickman observed that if a governing party adopts a mental model, it becomes a key part of the definition of all the terms resulting from the mental model. 
  • Drummond Reed agreed and posed some questions about how terms reference mental models. Are they just linked from their definitions in a terms wiki to a document that explains the mental model?
  • Rieks Joosten agreed, and pointed out that a term may be associated with more than one mental model.
  • As for where the mental models live, Rieks suggested that the mental models could live in the corpus similar to a concept would live in the model. These would be similar to including example files in the corpus. The corpus essentially can contain anything that's high enough quality to be reusable in the context of terminology.
  • DECISION: The CTWG specifications MUST support mental models as another type of artifact in our terminology corpus.

• What remains to take terms wikis fully into "production" for ToIP Working Groups (and others who may want to start using them)?
  • Daniel Hardman suggested the first step is deciding if we're ready to start telling different governing parties that they can start producing terms wikis.
  • First we should decide what additional documentation is needed.
  • A second suggestion is a "training video" to show how terms wikis work.
  • Rieks Joosten added that if we are going to produce these kinds of deliverables, then it would be ideal to have references to our own terms wiki about CTWG terminology.
• DECISION: The ToIP Concepts and Terminology User Guide was approved as Draft Deliverable of the CTWG. This guide:
1. explains the ideas (concepts) behind creating and maintaining a terminology for some purpose;
2. describes how a governing party (Working Group, Task Force, other group) can:
   1. create and maintain its required terminology in its own terms wiki;
   2. produce a glossary of the terms it maintains in its terms wiki and optionally include terms from other terms wikis
3. explains how an authoring party can create a deliverable (specification, recommendation, white paper, website, etc.) that can either:
   1. include a glossary of the terms needed within that scope, and/or
   2. include permalinks to terms within that integrated glossary, to an external glossary, or directly to terms defined on terms wiki pages.
4. is itself an example of what is described under points 1, 2 and 3, to which end it includes the ToIP Concepts and Terminology Glossary.
• DECISION: The ToIP Concepts and Terminology Glossary, to be maintained via the ToIP Concepts and Terminology Terms Wiki, was approved as Draft Deliverable of the CTWG.