Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata

Date & (Virtual) Location


Kantara GTM 2

Next Meeting:  



  • Review straw man & comments
  • Identify gaps in the outline
  • Drafting Assignments

Discussion items

N/AKick offAll
  • Suggest that John share the Notes page, and each participant open the Google Doc
  • Kantara has a formal liaison with ISO. Copies of some documents are available (restricted access) on the Kantara Board Liason Subcommittee wiki page. Kantara members may have access to relevant documents. Procedure to be clarified. Preference is for each person to access their own copy. During editing meetings, the host may share the standard for discussion purposes.
  • Cadence:
    • Week 1 Editing: Content Addition
    • Week 2 Editing: Revisions/Refinement
    • Week 3 DG: Feedback and start a new cycle
  • Use version history for track changes
  • Direct addition of content to be assigned as 'writing assignments'
  • Otherwise use "Suggestion" mode

Who's the audienceAll

From the charter: The participants in the Discussion Group will be industry, government, and civil society stakeholders with an interest in mobile Driving Licenses, identity proofing, Decentralized Identifiers, Verified Credentials and self-sovereign identity systems.

List of likely readers:

  • Architects responsible for applications using or interfacing with mDL hardware or software
  • Chief Privacy Officers at issuing authorities, verifiers, and relying parties
  • Data Protection Authorities
  • Architects and policy analysts in other digital identity communities of interest

Clarify the purpose & scope of the DG/Report
  • Identity Use Cases that effectively test the content of the document
    • ie Roadside Stop
  • mDL is a mobile ID issued by a state driving license authority, not a federally issued credential. Nothing prevents another authority (a University for example) from using 18013-5 as a standard for their own ID system. Any ID ecosystem using 18013-5 3 are therefore in scope.
  • DMV's issuing mDL's that are not 18013-5 compliant are out of scope BUT, ID systems based on 18013-5 that wish to interoperate with non-compliant systems are in scope to the extent that the report will describe the Privacy and Identity constraints that should be considered in their use cases.
  • Details of PKI are out of scope, other than to acknowledge the use of PKI should be standards compliant.
  • The operational definition of interoperability?

Ouline Review/Gaps
  • Do we need an 'ephemeral' use case?

Writing Assignments
See action items

Action items