Define TRTF Deliverables for V2

[andorsk]

For the trust registry task force deliverable, we should define the initial deliverables:

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1T2NIv4wCxqtTkzk76XtcZKP8gFM97u3YYuAscP8ZGX4/edit?usp=sharing

Based on conversations proposed at the TRTF, I'll lead with the following proposal of deliverables:

• Specifications : normative descriptions around trust service support. For more information, see the following issue: Define Scope of TRTF #50
• Companion Guide : non-normative suggestions around best practices and implementation guides.

To Close Issue:

• PR with placeholders for the deliverables.

I will spin up a separate issue related to the audience of the v2 deliverable.

[jacqueslatour]

@jacques - The spec should address global interoperability and unique identifiers and and I see trust registries as the enabler to enable scaling.

Scope to consider: global interoperability and unique identifiers, and how the DNS can be leveraged to enable this.

Also looking at documenting this as an IETF Internet Draft as well, so it can become an IETF standard one day, or BCP.

[andorsk]

Call on Jan 12 at ToIP

@tim Bouma: Agrees with the approach.
@a-fox : Not sure of the deliverables. Any trust decision has a liability into it. Needs to have legal and privacy people involved. Need to think more holistically. Need coherence and positioning so we can scope it better.
Tim: Always going to be debating content. Whatever we arrive at as a group needs to be concise and clear. Any additional context is in deliverable 2. People that care about this deliverable will care b/c lots of leaders are working on the deliverable.
@talltree : w3c also does the same spec and companion guide. Decide the pallet you're painting on. At the proper time, flush it out.
@darrellodonnell : two factors: the world is starting to learn layers 3 and 4. Urgency is required. Questions from the space is there now.
@andorsk liked the canvas concept.
@a-fox : major projects in the EU to be considered.
neil: let's make a matrix of what's being worked on. @a-fox : can use that to inform the scope.
Tim: careful we don't re-invent the wheel.
@talltree : let's remind ourselves of work done in security. DID trust list is fundamentally different than a DNS list. Targets to aim: Once ARF for European Digital Identity Wallet is published viky offered to present.
@a-fox Map input to trust models
jacques: DNS should align to the STRAWMAN. Complement.

Action Step Here:

• @darrellodonnell to throw down a swagger spec as a STRAWMAN
• consensus to start working toward a STRAWMAN deliverable. ALL deliverables.

[andorsk]

APAC call:

• Jo Spencer Context and technical layer should be addressed. Probably in the specification guide.
• @talltree Mission on charter page need to be cleared up:
  • 5 classes of deliverables. Deliverable on trust models should exist somewhere.
  • Decision of deliverables need to align with mission and scope of TF.