2020-07-15 Meeting
2020-06-17 Meeting (Open Conversation Edition)
- Presentation (Google Slides format—includes introductions to our first four Working Groups and instructions for joining)
- PDF Version for the Presentation
- Zoom recording
- John Jordan, as the newly appointed Executive Director, explained his proposed overall approach to monthly All-Member meetings.
- Alternate between two formats
- One month will be an informal meeting devoted to dialog with the overall membership
- The next month will be a more structured meeting with report outs from the Steering Committee, Working Groups and Task Forces
- We have now passed 100 total members
- 18 Steering
- 1 Associate
- 69 Contributors (Organizations)
- 12 Contributors (Individuals)
- John announced that the Steering Committee has approved hiring of a full-time Program Manager, Dave Luchuk, under a secondment program with the Government of Canada
- Dave will start as soon as the paperwork can be completed—hopefully by the end of June
- That will supplement the great work Todd Benzies has been doing for the Foundation
- Todd then talked about the collaboration tools that have been set up for Foundation
- Dan Gisolfi next summarized how we'll be using Github
- Each WG will determine who the maintainers will be for their repos
- We are still in the phase of determining the governance rules and processes
- In the meantime, he asks that all new members learn about using Github — he recommends Github Learning Labs
- John then shared some thoughts about the overall culture and community within the Foundation
- Trust is inherently a human experience and a community experience
- It is very much subject to cultural and local conditions
- He gave as an example a pharmaceutical safety system in the Province of British Columbia, public identifiers are used in order to build trust, however citizen IDs are not publicly published or shared because that would be a privacy issue. So context is supremely important in trusted interactions.
- These considerations about the cultural and jurisdictional differences in trust and regulation must be something we deal with across our WGs and TFs
- He also felt it was important that we have a "responsible sense of urgency" about our mission here. In other words, we shouldn't go too fast, yet we should feel the urgency of solving vital trust issues on the Internet today, as there are many.
- John then invited questions from the membership via the chat facility in Zoom
- A question was asked about the TIP (ToIP Interoperability Profile) process
- Dan Gisolfi explained that ToIP Foundation deliverables include specifications, white papers, best practices, etc.
- A TIP is not intended to be a full ToIP specification but an interoperability profile that brings together different standards into a full interop
- He pointed to this page in the Technical Stack WG branch of the wiki to explain the basic idea of a TIP
- Drummond then explained that he is taking input and putting together a proposal for defining a specific set of artifact types and processes for producing them:
- TSS (ToIP Standard Specification) — apply to both
- TIP (ToIP Interoperability Profile)
- TST (ToIP Standard Template)
- TBP (ToIP Best Practices)
- Jim St. Clair pointed out that in the work he's done in the healthcare industry, you need to be able to point to full SDO-approved standards, so having that long-term focus is a good goal
- The question was asked about the differences between Working Groups (WGs) and Task Force (TFs)
- Drummond pointed to this page on the wiki
- A WG is a formal JDF construct that needs a formal charter and approval by the Steering Committee
- A TF is a much lighter weight mechanism that can be spun up much more quickly — all that is required at a minimum is a wiki page defining the objective of the TF and how to participate
- A TF can be larger and deeper if needed, but that should be coordinated with the parent WG or the Steering Committee
- John answered a question about the longer-term business and sustainability model of the Foundation
- John answered a question about privacy considerations in our different specs and deliverables
- The Foundation's role is not to dictate privacy requirements, but to highlight privacy considerations that governance authorities using our specifications and tools should focus on in their governance frameworks
- Drummond clarified that the ToIP Foundation's role is to define specifications, templates, models, and tools for governance authorities (GAs) to use to develop and implement governance frameworks and developers to create interoperable implementations of the technical components specified by those GFs.
- So GAs can and should set their own privacy requirements, not the ToIP Foundation.
- John closed by thanking the over 50 members who joined the All-Member meeting and inviting them to the next one in July.
2020-05-20 Meeting
- Presentation (Google Slides format—includes introductions to our first four Working Groups and instructions for joining)
- Zoom recording