September 3, 2021
|Action Item Update - ToIP Approved Deliverable Template
|Action Item Update - ToIP Year in Review
|BLOGs for Approved Deliverables
Judith Fleenor and All
|Position Papers Discussion
|Community Response to the DID v1 REC vote
|LF marketing support for JDF projects- coming soon
- Agenda Topics (pdf):
Action Item Update - ToIP Approved Deliverables Template
Judith Fleenorshared that RJ Reiserand James from Liquid Avatar and Drummond Reedand herself have created templates to be used for our deliverables. Since James had not come on the call, the topic was postponed.
Action Item Update - ToIP Year in Review
David Lucatchprovided a draft of the year in review that was attached to the meeting agenda.
Ajay Madhokprovided a draft infographic which was presented in the slide deck.
Judith Fleenorexpressed the following concerns and raised the following questions about the Year In Review
- Not is same voice
- Doesn’t tell a story
- Laundry List vs High Points
- Purpose - BLOG vs Year End Report
- Importance and Uses
Drummond Reedafter seeing Ajay's infographic stated that he thought High Points should be the goal.
Steven Milsteinsuggested in chat that the infographic have indicators of status of each item on the infographic
John Jordanoffered Alex Metcalf to help wordsmith/finalize the Year In Review
Judith Fleenor mentioned that one of her uses for this document would be to assist in attracting new members and during the membership renewal process.
More dialogue available in the recording.
BLOGs for Approved Deliverables
Judith Fleenor stated that in alignment with the Communications Committee's BLOG Post Guidelines and recommendation that a BLOG be submit with the GSWG has prepared a BLOG for their recently approved deliverables. The BLOG was sent to the Communications Committee for approval with the agenda. Judith Fleenor asked if there were any objections to the BLOG as presented. Drummond Reedsaid the BLOG needed more work, including a better hook. Therefore the BLOG was not approved for posting at this time and has been sent back to the Working Group for editing.
Position Papers Discussion
Steven Milstein presented the idea from the ISWG for position papers being published on our Website.
The ISWG feels that the solutions they are surfacing do not lend themselves well to White Papers.
They are still at the hypothetical stage. Thus...
The purpose of the Position Papers is to offer high-level opinions of perceived problem/solutions.
The hope by posting these, they not only attract like-minded thinkers to ToIP, but more importantly, opposing opinions that will generate their own Position Papers.
Reason to put them on the ToIP Website
The original thought was to post them to Confluence or, GitHub Wikis to follow the Terms & Concepts lead. GitHub Wikis does not support Google Analytics. (Checking if Confluence can have Google Analytics turned on.) Thus, the working group proposing this feels the WordPress site is best suited for Executive Summaries coupled with more detailed Position Papers. With the help of Google Analytics, they hope to better connect with the marketplace, improve engagement and drive future Deliverables of greater interest.Discussion
Judith Fleenorwill discuss with Alex Metcalf the best way of publishing these type of papers on our Website.
More dialogue available in the recording.
Community Response to the DID v1 REC vote
- Mozilla publicly posted a formal objection to W3C approving the W3C Decentralized Identifiers (DIDs) 1.0 specification
- There is a dialogue going on right now between the W3C DID WG chairs and the W3C Director about approval
- DIF has offered to collaborate with ToIP to issue a joint statement of support
- The W3C DID WG chairs have indicated that would be helpful if they could have it by next Wednesday
- The proposal is to create a small Communications Committee SWAT team to help draft the joint statement via a Google doc
After a robust discussion it was decided:
The committee is supportive of creating a joint statement in support of the W3C Decentralized Identifiers (DIDs) 1.0 specification. For that unified statement of support for the specification three members of our Communications team will work with whomever DIF specifies to align on the supportive statement with quotes from hopefully, John Jordon and Rouven Heck. They are Drummond Reed John Jordan and Daniel Bachenheimer
The committee felt the statement regarding the direct rebuttal to the Mozilla public statements are best coming from the Working Group.
Drummond Reed mentioned that they have met this morning and are already drafting rebuttal text.
Judith Fleenorwill communicate with DIF about who to connect with for drafting our joint statement with DIF.
John Jordan will be sending out a notice to the ToIP Steering Committee for transparency, but we are not expecting any objections. Drummond Reed sending out a notice to our All Members list will how to participate in the process of drafting the rebuttal statements of the working groups.
LF Marketing Support for JDF projects
Judith Fleenor shared two items soon available to JDF projects:
- LF is working on a pipeline for JDF projects to submit LF Newsworthy topic to be placed in the LF newsletter and social media
- Future, they are working on perhaps providing Marketing Packages that JDF project may purchase which would include media and public relations support.
(Not available yet. This is just a heads up. Something we might consider in the future.)
We ran out of time to Brainstorm what topic we might want to put into the LF pipeline.
- Action Item: Judith Fleenorto work with Alex Metcalf on ToIP Year In Review and Web publishing plan for "Discussion Papers."
- Action Item: Ajay Madhokto work with Alex Metcalf on the ToIP Year In Review story/infographic.
- Action Item: Drummond ReedDaniel BachenheimerJohn Jordanto work on joint state from DIF and ToIP in support of DID spec. And, to communicate to both the SC and All Members list for transparency, objections, and participation.
- Action item: Judith Fleenorto follow-up with James about the Deliverables Template, and find a way for its approval of the communications committee before the next meeting or add it to next meeting as a topic.
- Action Item:
- Action Item: