Hi All,
first of all: great work!
Then: sorry for not being able to particiapte during the past few
weeks (months?)
I was checking the report, and realized that there is still the 'Identity and Access Management' Stuff missing. I think the work from other groups I am participating in (namely: IDPro (Body of Knowledge) and IRM) might be helpful, so I collected from those work some details and adjusted slightly for this groups purpose.
To not pollute your nice doc with my stupid comments, I have attached the draft here. Its based on the Taxonomy we developed for IDPRo, which categorizes IDM Stuff into 4 Areas (Identity/Management/Authentication/Authorization). For the analysis, I have started on the 'Identities' view already, the others just got tagged for continuation. Maybe it is useful for the group.
For me it was definitely a useful check if the BoK-Taxonomy
works....
Cheers and happy to meet some of you on EIC Munich in May
Thorsten
http://kantarainitiative.org/confluence/display/BSC/2017-04+%28April+2017%29+Meetings#id-2017-04(April2017)Meetings-Thursday,April27Agenda:
- Report work
Attending: Eve, Matisse, Marco, Thomas, Susan, Jeff, Maryann, Kathleen, JohnW
The candidate recommendations are, so far, not captured in the report – . Let's confirm today which ones we "believe in", and add any others, and then put them in the report.
Kathleen notes that ONC is beginning work on a trust framework/contract. Hopefully
Our WG recommendation: How about: Spin up a WG to develop on blockchains and smart contract good practice on use and handling of data related to individuals so as to facilitate individual autonomy [and enable equitable and efficient participation in transaction ecosystems?].
John talks about knowledge, choice, and control as the three axes of autonomy. Ecosystems typically constrain autonomy.
Add to potential liaison relationships: ONC and HL7.
The recommendation we want to make has a pretty sharp audience, set of outputs, set of activities, and set of directions for next steps.
We've talked from time to time about the UMA Legal subgroup possibly spinning up as its own group. Maybe there's something to think about here – combining forces, or two separate WGs? Maybe a "Legal WG" with Kantara-wide scope would make sense; John repeats himself in Legal, CIS, a lot. It would need to be able to produce technical specs as well (that is, have the right IPR policy for that).
Kickstarting the good practice work: We want to recommend to all the "legal capacity to contract" (parties/counterparties) people that they should be using identity standards and, as much as possible, standard claim catalogs so that they can get the benefit of standard flows and standard claim/attribute semantics. (Point to "Analysis of Integrating Legal Contracts and Smart Contracts" section.)
Eve made up an editing task list for herself and Thomas. Keep an eye on report changes.
AI: All: Please review the Report and comment in it or on the list! Keep in mind we're at the very end.
AI: Eve: Ask for one more meeting next Thursday. It's the LAST ONE.
Eve Maler
ForgeRock Office of the CTO | VP Innovation & Emerging Technology
Cell +1 425.345.6756 | Skype: xmlgrrl | Twitter: @xmlgrrl
_______________________________________________ DG-BSC mailing list DG-BSC@kantarainitiative.org http://kantarainitiative.org/mailman/listinfo/dg-bsc