Minutes of the W3C Rights Automation Community Group 2021-03-31

Please find the minutes of last week's meeting at https://www.w3.org/2021/03/31-md-odrl-profile-minutes.html and pasted below:

Summary of resolutions

  1.  To approach the CDMC /FINOS as a venue for specifying interoperability<https://www.w3.org/2021/03/31-md-odrl-profile-minutes.html#r01>

Attendees

Present
Adam H, Ali M, Atiq K, Belen B, Ilya S, Jeremy B, Josh C, Laura, Mark D, Mevan J, Nigel P
Regrets
-
Chair
Ben
Scribe
JoshC, joshuaCornejo
Contents

  1.  Summary of resolutions<https://www.w3.org/2021/03/31-md-odrl-profile-minutes.html#ResolutionSummary>

Meeting minutes

<ben> https://www.w3.org/2021/03/17-md-odrl-profile-minutes.html

Ben: Resolution of previous meeting's minutes
… <describes conversation and interaction with FISD/David>
… what is their response about having a debate about Rights Management?

Nigel: there is a lot of value in a panel, with interactions and opinions. Ideally a few differing opinions, maybe not a skeptic, but people with different positions and give a balance to the panel.

Ilya: having been on a couple of these, it all depends on the moderator, pick someone that can drive the conversation/controversy

Atiq: is that why to bring the skeptic?

Ilya: does anyone know a skeptic that wants to speak in an open forum?

Ben: I have someone in mind, I am speaking with someone next week

Ilya: I have a difference with David, a demo - seeing a visual really creates converts rather than just a slide deck

Ben: I don't think either/or - because 60 minutes is very tight
… it is around 45 minutes of time, with 15 minutes to do a demo

Nigel: specially if you do it as a can demo with a video

Ilya: that needs more preparation

Ben: I think we can manage

Nigel: the supply chain PoC can possibly make a candidate, there were some visuals in there that would help to get the message a bit

Ben: yep, but it took half hour to do it

Ilya: at this point we should agree on the point and then find a candidate

Ben: agree
… I am going to call on another person: Mark Durenberger

Mark: I 100% agree on moderator, really important for a panel. If you have a good representation across (different stakeholders) there is inherently benefits to some parties that are not necessarily benefits to others, and the moderator can push each a bit. Case being that I have seen D.Rights in some cases, like static reports with bread crumbs (digital trails)
… for suppliers to track compliance, for the consumer the audit implications

Ben: OK
… really useful

Ben: Adam asked how do we differentiate from previous events?

Ben: probably giving more time to the demos, would be better

Ali: I've been made aware that there is a webinar next week - a continuation from a previous one - about market data. Looks part of the agenda is about solutions.

Ali: full disclosure they also asked me to be on their panel

Ben: yes, that's good to know
… have they confirmed any speakers?

Ali: no, not heard yet

Ben: if you speak, do warm the audience for us

Mark: in the first of those that happened, Mark B put a plug on it and there are some synergies with what was spoken last time and next week.
… a lot of it is about the challenges of the vendors/consumers and the alignment. This endevour may address in part all of that. The hope is that we can come up with some alignment and the automation of bits & pieces, I don't think our toes will step on by that panel.

Mark B: that is exactly, it is broader compliance, and a big part of the need is that a bit of the puzzle. On that last panel, I tried not to make ODRL so 'huge' that I would never happen. Highlighting our greater hopes and ambitions and showing our small steps on the road on breaking the world.

Nigel: the key is incremental delivery.

Ben: I hope the demos can speak on those points, here is some automation to minimise the pain points.
… thanks for that, really useful. Lots of time to prepare
… the next issue is interoperability testing, about the robustness of the standard
… this is published in the context of W3C, primarily driven by technology and developers of web browsers
… focused on interoperability, to allow machine to machine communication, it seems to make sense to take this seriously and have something to say about it.
… there is a parallel initiative - the cloud data management, ran by the EDMC council, a lot of financial institutions and cloud providers run it.
… one of it threads/themes is rights management. And how financial institutions will be able to migrate to the cloud
… as part of that initiative they are working with FINOS to have some interoperability
… to have some tests and have guarantee of interoperability
… I wonder, Adam have you heard of this initiative

Adam: yes, I have, it is more about open source
… it is more about identity and access management control

Ben: I did write the standard for access management and left lots of space for this type of work we are doing here

Adam: definitely, we should call them and find how to get our synergies

Ben: yes, I have spoken to them and they seem to be interested in anyone to go first

Adam: not sure if FINOS would be right at this stage

Ben: what is your feeling Atiq?

Atiq: there are many firms exploring cloud, we kind of need to have some standards
… we need some governance about data
… you should set the standards now

Ilya: <speaks about one experience with FINOS>

Atiq: <speaks about another experience and how to split specification from code>

Mevan: I am kind of new on this, but from where I am coming from, we are talking how we can adopt this with Snowflake

Ben: interesting you mention Snowflake, they are particularly interested in the DRM part of this

Mevan: right now they are focusing on access control and their next interest is DRM

Ben: at least if we did some specification work via CDMC we would get Snowflake involved
… I will go back to the CDMC and report on this conversation, is there anyone that wants to add anything?

RESOLUTION: To approach the CDMC /FINOS as a venue for specifying interoperability