Skip to main content

Meeting 2026-05-15 0154 AEST

UN CEFACT GTR - AEST / PST​

May 14, 2026

Attendees​

  • Sankarshan
  • John
  • Darrell (first half)
  • Hans
  • Anna
  • Mark

Summary​

Registry updates and public review preparation strategies were analyzed alongside operational sustainability models for grid implementation.

Digital Identity Anchor Updates
Definitions were refined and consolidated within the glossary to ensure consistency. Redundant documentation was removed to streamline the implementation guidelines.

Public Review Readiness
Documentation is deemed sufficiently mature for the 60-day public review phase. The project decided to officially initiate this process with the Bureau to gather external feedback.

Functional Equivalence Discussions
Technical requirements for functional equivalence were clarified to satisfy potential legal scrutiny. Participants reviewed the minimalist operational model required for the system.

Next steps​

  • [John Phillips, Alina] Notify Chairs: Draft and send an email to the vice chair and chairs. Request guidance on the public review process and highlight the implementation guideline document.

  • [Hans J. Huber] Contact Alina: Relay the recommendation regarding functional equivalence and the need to enumerate associated functions to Alina.

Details​

  • Meeting Opening and Agenda: John Phillips opened the call by welcoming participants to the UN/CEFACT Global Trust Registry project and confirmed that all attendees were familiar with the project’s code of conduct and Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) rules. John Phillips shared the meeting agenda, which followed the established standing agenda for the project, and confirmed that the previous meeting's minutes and recordings were available on the project website.

  • Digital Identity Anchor Glossary Update: John Phillips led a discussion regarding the definition of the Digital Identity Anchor (DIA). Following a merge request from Alina, the team integrated email feedback from Hans J. Huber to improve the terminology and ordering of the definition. John Phillips also added explanatory text regarding functional equivalence to the glossary. Additionally, the team identified and removed a lingering, orphan definition of the DIA that existed in the implementation guidelines, choosing to link all references directly to the glossary to ensure consistency.

  • Preparing for Public Review: John Phillips stated that the team, including Alina, believes the current documentation is mature enough to move to the public review phase with the UN/CEFACT Bureau. This transition would initiate a 60-day period for public comments and further discussions. John Phillips explained that they must specifically inform the Bureau that the project proposes an operating system called "Grid," which differs from a typical white paper or business requirement specification. John Phillips and Alina intend to email the Bureau chairs—Scott, Steve Capel, and Nancy Norris—to solicit their advice on this process and confirm readiness.

  • Discussion on Functional Equivalence: Hans J. Huber advised the group to be prepared to enumerate the specific functions behind authoritative register entries when using the term "functional equivalence". Hans J. Huber noted that in the context of electronic transferable records, this term pertains to functions such as possession, exclusivity, and control, and cautioned that legal experts might request a detailed breakdown. John Phillips acknowledged this, noting that Alina, who is a lawyer familiar with MLETR, deliberately chose the term to reflect that a digital record maintains the same legal weight as a physical one.

  • Operational Capacity and Minimalization: Addressing project sustainability, John Phillips explained that the implementation guidelines describe a low-weight, self-sustaining operational model for the "Grid" system. John Phillips highlighted that the ICAO Public Key Directory (PKD) system, which handles international passport verification, operates with only 1.5 staff members, demonstrating that a minimalist approach is feasible for such systems.

  • UN Transparency Protocol Update: John Phillips provided an update on the United Nations Transparency Protocol (UNTP) project, noting that version 0.7 is scheduled to enter a public review phase in the coming days. The UN/CEFACT Bureau has approved this move, and the team is currently retooling sandbox environments to allow participants to explore UNTP implementations over a two-week window.

  • Project-Related Conference Attendance: John Phillips noted that an upcoming conference in London regarding supply chain and organizational identity will feature presentations from Steve Capel, Nancy Norris, and Lucy Yang. John Phillips mentioned that while some participants will join via video call, they plan to attend the event in person.

  • Clarification of the Public Review Process: Ann Dao requested clarification on whether the project's public review would follow a formal 60-day structure similar to other UN/CEFACT projects. John Phillips confirmed that this is a standard stage-gate process, where the current documentation serves as a stable baseline for a 60-day feedback window, after which the team will address comments and finalize the document. John Phillips noted that they would seek specific process guidance from Steve Capel and Nancy Norris.

  • Meeting Conclusion and Participation: Mark Lizar asked about the current status of the public review, and John Phillips clarified that since active participants have already been reviewing the material, the formal process acts as an official announcement to invite broader external feedback. John Phillips concluded the recorded portion of the meeting, offering to continue discussions on other topics after stopping the recording.

Chat​

00:06:12.518,00:06:15.518

sankarshan: DIA definition is available from https://un.opensource.unicc.org/unece/uncefact/gtr/docs/Documents/Glossary (post the merge of the changed text)

00:19:11.198,00:19:14.198

Mark Lizar: is there is a link for public review