Hi all -
The notes from today's call are available online: http://kantarainitiative.org/confluence/x/XYKOAw
I want to bring particular attention to the notes on "Deciding our own next steps" since we'll be taking this in to the discussion with the LC tomorrow. Comments are welcome!
----
Deciding our own next steps
1. refining gaps and recommendations,
2. determining what should be handled by existing groups vs. what will require a new group
Heather's suggestions:
* A new attribute working group with the mandate of defining context and clarifying use; this will also probably get in to definitions
This will include continuing to develop the repository
If we want to go this route, need to follow the By-Laws for the creation of a new group (see section 5.3 of the KI Bylaws) - Keith Hazelton, Sal D'Agostino will work on a charter
(Ken) suggest that a charter remain Draft until the F2F in August, since hopefully the scope of various working groups may get defined there
* For the Definitions and general coordination, recommend we continue to use the cross-WG meta-group of the P3WG, IAWG, HIAWG, and the Attribute group (no new group)
* For "Trust Frameworks" gap, recommend we pass this over to the Trust Framework Meta Model WG
* For Governance, formally pass this over to the ISOC group working in this space
(Sal) there needs to be coordination among the various groups working the attribute issue
if we recommend this route, there needs to be more in the repository linking the ISOC work
* For Mechanisms, perhaps the NSTIC group? Thinking of the Scalable Privacy proposal which will be tackling these issues
(Colin) concern with going with NSTIC is the non-global nature of the work
(Keith) need to think about what we actually mean when we say "NSTIC" - this might be better to go to federation operators or something
(Sal) OIX might be a better place; in either case, we won't be tackling mechanism
----- Original Message -----
From: "Heather Flanagan"