Ever since Kim Cameron's Laws of Identity, the industry seems to gravitate towards the use of the term "Laws". But I think what this document really is is a specification of design requirements for a new system(s) capable of meeting the objectives stated in the introduction.

I have no particular agita over these design requirements. But I feel that framing them properly as design requirements, rather than laws, offers flexibility to design alternative systems that may select only a subset or explicitly violate one or more laws. At this early stage I prefer this flexibility to the immutable sound of "Laws."

Jeff

On Fri, Mar 6, 2015 at 8:57 PM, Salvatore D'Agostino <sal@idmachines.com> wrote:

Here is the link I mentioned, we also have a twitter handle for the group of @irmwg and use the same for a hashtag #irmwg.

https://kantarainitiative.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/Kantara-Initiative-IRM-Laws-of-Relationship-Final-Report-v1.0.pdf

Other Kantara reports are here: https://kantarainitiative.org/reports-recommendations/

Enjoy the weekend.

Sal

Salvatore D'Agostino
IDmachines LLC
1264 Beacon Street, #5
Brookline, MA 02446
USA
http://www.idmachines.com
http://idmachines.blogspot.com
@idmachines
+1 617.201.4809 ph
+1 617.812.6495 fax

_______________________________________________
DG-IDoT mailing list
DG-IDoT@kantarainitiative.org
http://kantarainitiative.org/mailman/listinfo/dg-idot

Jeff Stollman
stollman.j@gmail.com
1 202.683.8699

Truth never triumphs — its opponents just die out.

Science advances one funeral at a time.

Max Planck