• Start recording
• Welcome & antitrust notice
• Introduction of new members
• Agenda review

• 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:

Discussion of progress on the working draft of the ToIP Technology Architecture Specification (TAS). Links to relevant documents and diagrams:

• TAS GitHub Markdown version
• TAS GitHub Issues
• TAS GitHub Discussions
• TAS Source Diagrams (Google Slides) <== SOURCE DIAGRAMS used in the TAS
• ToIP Protocol Stack Diagrams (Google Slides) <== All of all our past diagrams (some of which have been copied to TAS Source Diagrams)
• TAS WORKING DRAFT 03 Google doc version <== REFERENCE ONLY — NO LONGER ACTIVE
• TAS OLD WORKING DRAFT 02 Google Doc version <== REFERENCE ONLY — NO LONGER ACTIVE
• Evolution of the ToIP Stack <== NEW proposed companion document
• TATF Google Drive Folder <== WHERE ALL OF THE ABOVE may be found

https://hackmd.io/7FGDfgIfTBWrd1wQ7RngSQ?both

* Andor
    * $f(x) \to g(y) \to h(z)$
    * 
    * Humility we don't know what contexts will be required
    * Suggestion: Move the current stuff into a folder for `v1` and create a new folder for `v2`. 
* John: 
    * Two different things:
        * Standards bodies aligning
        * Not a technology issue a goverannce issue for v1
        * Alice --> Bob : trying to discern trust:
            * might look up trust registry
            * might do other things.
            * $f(x)$ very complicated decision process.
    * some of these decisions are not computationally decisive
    * In place conversion from v1 to v2 w/ PR
        * If major version change, might be easier to start with a fresh page. 
    * Continuity
        * v2 
    * 2 things we are doing:
        * Trying to do things right in the spec. 
        * Adoption.
* Jo: More aware of the larger landscape in v2
    * VC: evidence field might be helpful 
            * a set of ways you might check about it. 
            * reference check dids
    * Discovery:
            * generalized search function
            * some other context
    * Mistake of reductionism toward a very complicated problem
    * v1: 3 simple trust services:
        * issues, verifiers, governance. Is that enough. 
    * How do we create a more broad defined understanding of the role of the trust registries and consistent. 
    * Split $f(x)$ into two components. 
    * f <- categories of internal, external information. 
    * robodebt: work out how much people should be paid for social services. 
    * generalize information to the whole environment. specific information not going to get into. 
    * Trust registries. Not talking about trust decisions.
    * Externalization of capabilities through services. 
        * Define services. 
    * fuzzy matching
    * onion picture
    * v1: 3 basic bits of information
        * externalize that 
    * $f(x) = f(x_1) + f(x_2) ... f(x_n)$ 
        * $f(x_1, x_2, ..., x_n)$ = $(f(X))$ where ${x_1, x_2\,..., x_n \in X}$
    * $x_1$ services provided by the ecosystem
        * **FOCUS OF SPEC is HERE**
    * $x_2$ internal to the decision maker.
    * $x_3$ things external from the decision maker and the environment. 
* Definitions of services in v1 need to be redefined in v2
* Terminology will change across versions.
* Good this TF is thinking about this more hollistically. 

```mermaid 
graph TD
    onion((onion))
    actor
    actor --> onion
```

• Review decisions/action items
• Planning for next meeting