[KI-LC] Cross-Group Participation
Colin.Wallis at dia.govt.nz
Wed Dec 16 15:50:30 EST 2009
eGov potentially has use cases to give to ID-WSF, is supposedly working on a cross group common (life event type) use case that would raise gaps that multiple groups could potentially fulfil requirements from. In the absence of eGov having got that off the ground, Info Sharing's use case is becoming the very useful default there. So I see no problems arising out of this kind of contribution.
Then we come to actually contributing something that will end up being published. I know Bob particularly, was concerned that when it comes to publishing things together, we need to look at the specific set of IPR policies of the groups. If they don't 'match' what do we do?
So two problems:
1) IPR - contributing real knowledge to the solution that is to be published
2) Copyright - we have the precedent of giving it to 'Kantara Communications' to publish, in essence under a RF/RAND approach if I recall correctly, gives us guidance
Adding Iain's response so we keep one thread..
Hi Brett, the Information Sharing WG would wish to continue to work with Eve and the UMA group to explore the clear synergies between the two.
Likewise we continue to tune into the P3 group and would expect the synergies there to develop over time.
Our experience to date would suggest that this works well enough without a formal process.
Hope that helps.
From: lc-bounces at kantarainitiative.org [mailto:lc-bounces at kantarainitiative.org] On Behalf Of Robin Wilton
Sent: Thursday, 10 December 2009 6:40 a.m.
To: Brett McDowell
Cc: Kantara Leadership Council
Subject: Re: [KI-LC] Cross-Group Participation
I have two things which are likely to need collaboration between P3WG and the eGov WG...
1 - Help requested by DIFI (Norway) on "use of electronic identifiers in public sector e-procurement" (as currently being raised by Colin); his group doesn't see that as a core topic for them... so one option is for
P3 to do it, but with some liaison from eGov.
2 - The ISO editorial work on Privacy Capability Maturity Model.
Brett McDowell wrote:
> This email is to initiate the formal work of the subcommittee tasked to find a way to facilitate cross-group participation.
> My hypothesis is that we do not need a formal process. We simply need to draft a FAQ that interprets existing policies.
> To test that assertion, can we start to collect the "use cases" that test that assertion? What do any of you want to (or wanted to) achieve through cross-group collaboration?
> Brett McDowell | http://info.brettmcdowell.com |
> LC mailing list
> LC at kantarainitiative.org
Director - Future Identity Ltd
+44 (0)705 005 2931
mail at futureidentity.eu
CAUTION: This email message and any attachments contain information that may be confidential and may be LEGALLY PRIVILEGED. If you are not the intended recipient, any use, disclosure or copying of this message or attachments is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email message in error please notify us immediately and erase all copies of the message and attachments. Thank you.
More information about the LC