http://kantarainitiative.org/confluence/display/uma/UMA+legal+subgroup+notes 2016-01-08 - Review proposed mission and timeline https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/kantara-initiative-uma-wg/-xxfPj0xJS... - Review high-level requirements https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/kantara-initiative-uma-wg/-xxfPj0xJS... - Review latest candidate model text http://www.commonaccord.org/index.php?action=list&file=GH/KantaraInitiative/UMA-Text/ Attending: Eve, Ann, Jim, Adrian, Jon, Mark, Thomas, Bill Wendell (guest - ears only), Andrew Hughes, Sal Mission and timeline discussion A proposed mission and timeline were sent in this message https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/kantara-initiative-uma-wg/-xxfPj0xJS... . Jon speaks in support of the three goals. Is "model clauses" the right phrase, given that "EU model clauses" is something of a term of art? We're free to call it whatever we want. RoboClauses? [image: (smile)] Maybe the connection to EU model clauses is helpful to us. Regarding meeting scheduling, if text review is paramount in the early going, availability of interested parties is the most key. Offline review and reporting of comments by others could work great. "Model text" was Eve's temporary phrase covering not just the clauses but also the definition. "Model T – you can start with any color you want, as long as it's black!" We're thinking that the "standard" meeting time of Fridays at 8am PT would be okay for starters in working on the model text. Note that Eve can't make January 22, so maybe we can move or skip that one. Andrew's project is holding a F2F in January, and by February will possibly be really ready to need our outputs. Right now they're wrestling with different views on what "authorization" means. Is it authorization to release information? access to an API? (UMA would rely on the semantics of the API being protected for the definition.) Mark notes that consent and permission definitions should come into the picture as well. This does actually impact our term definitions because we use the word "Authorization" as part of our UMA role names, and so we may have to define Authorization, or at least define it in a limited sense so that a context in which the word is defined in a different sense is not incompatible or confusing wrt our usage. If there is, somewhere (EU?), a standard vocabulary, can we leverage it? Or is it too backwards-looking? Let's add this to our open issues. *AI:* Eve: Add model text issues to our issues backlog and tag them appropriately, including the issue of defining authorization, consent, etc. Consenus on the mission is positive. What should our timeline actually be? Jim recommends that we target a real version number of 1.0. We can achieve this sooner rather than later if we have real review by people who really need this text! Eve has been collecting external reviewer candidates. We did some more brainstorming. The right time for a beta version of the model text for review: end of March 2016. *AI:* Eve: Send continuing calendar invitations. Requirements discussion Some proposed high-level requirements were sent in this message https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/kantara-initiative-uma-wg/-xxfPj0xJS... . Eve did a quick reading of the proposed high-level requirements. People started dropping off, but it sounded like there was at least some weak rough consensus. [image: (smile)] We'll work with this list for now until it proves problematic. Draft model text The latest model text for review, with commentary, was sent in this message https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/kantara-initiative-uma-wg/j5hKnR6VB5.... It lives persistently here http://www.commonaccord.org/index.php?action=list&file=GH/KantaraInitiative/UMA-Text/ . We took a quick look at the message sent out. *Eve Maler*Cell +1 425.345.6756 | Skype: xmlgrrl | Twitter: @xmlgrrl