Hi Steve and Nat - I've reposted the commenting link to the current version of the BoK.

Nat - the approach to organization that we settled on is intended to make it easier to describe the practices, concepts and documented standards in the body of knowledge. We structured to try and answer "What should an ID Pro doing xxxxx be expected to know?"

If the approach assumptions are correct, it should leave us with the ability to quickly map out job function groupings or knowledge domain groupings. Both of which are useful retrieval patterns. But we will see soon enough.

At this point in time, the WG call is scheduled for Central Europe (Thorsten-leader), UK (Stu) and North America (the rest) - which makes it impossible for Japan, Australia and New Zealand. We (speaking for Thorsten) are open to doing APAC times as well if it will help move the work forward. 

andrew.

Andrew Hughes CISM CISSP 
Independent Consultant
In Turn Information Management Consulting

o  +1 650.209.7542
m +1 250.888.9474
1249 Palmer Road,
Victoria, BC V8P 2H8
AndrewHughes3000@gmail.com 
ca.linkedin.com/pub/andrew-hughes/a/58/682/
Identity Management | IT Governance | Information Security 

On Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 6:30 AM, Nat Sakimura <nat@sakimura.org> wrote:

Since 11am easter will be 1am Tokyo time, I will not be able to participate in the call, but I will try to contribute.
Could you kindly give the URI for the google doc?

Since I have not seen the doc, it may be completely off, but I would like to make following remarks on the writing we would do.

1. We need to have a solid way of talking/writing. Looking at the discussions, I see the lack of the systematic approach to it. I would suggest us to adopt ISO/IEC Directive Part 2 [1]. You may feel that it is too strict, but it will pay off immediately. I am open to adopt other directives if it is at least as strict as ISO/IEC Directive Part 2, but I have not found one yet.

[1] http://isotc.iso.org/livelink/livelink?func=ll&objId=4230456&objAction=browse&sort=subtype

2. Adopt ISO definitions where possible. Many of them are not so great, but are much better than some loose definitions. ISO definitions are freely available unlike ISO documents themselves.

3. Make distinction between definition and requirements. I see too many instances of confusions (not here but elsewhere.)

---
Nat Sakimura
Chairman, OpenID Foundation

On 2017-03-08 09:29, Andrew Hughes wrote:

As the recent list threads highlight, there is a need for a
consolidated body of knowledge.

We have developed a simple taxonomy and are working on itemizing
"things ID Pros should know or know about for the profession" within
that basic structure.

We are not writing the book of knowledge - just the table of contents.

Our approach right now is pretty sporadic - contributing to the google
doc - our pace is limited by the number of people showing up
regularly. If you can contribute time to organize in-person sessions
or other construction methods, please step up.

Meeting times are Mondays 11am Eastern.

thanks
andrew.

ANDREW HUGHES CISM CISSP 
Independent Consultant
IN TURN INFORMATION MANAGEMENT CONSULTING

o  +1 650.209.7542
m +1 250.888.9474
 1249 Palmer Road,
Victoria, BC V8P 2H8
AndrewHughes3000@gmail.com 
ca.linkedin.com/pub/andrew-hughes/a/58/682/ [1]
IDENTITY MANAGEMENT | IT GOVERNANCE | INFORMATION SECURITY 

Links:
------
[1] http://ca.linkedin.com/pub/andrew-hughes/a/58/682/

_______________________________________________
DG-IDPro mailing list
DG-IDPro@kantarainitiative.org
http://kantarainitiative.org/mailman/listinfo/dg-idpro

______________________________ _________________
DG-IDPro mailing list
DG-IDPro@kantarainitiative.org
http://kantarainitiative.org/mailman/listinfo/dg-idpro