[Speaker 8] Hi there. [Speaker 7] Hi there. [Speaker 1] Hi everyone. I'm just busy clicking admit, admit, admit. [Speaker 7] Hi everyone. [Speaker 8] Admit nothing. It wasn't me. [Speaker 7] I think calendars remain one of the wicked unsolved problems of business life. [Speaker 1] Yeah, that's one of the things I want to talk about. I'm getting, because I put the whole transparency team mailing list as the attendance of a meeting, every time someone gets added, everyone gets spammed. I've got to try and, I think we need to fix that. [Speaker 7] That's why I've done, I've tried to publish the calendar and people can subscribe to the calendar kind of thing rather than invite them explicitly. So you risk dropout, you know, people not knowing. [Speaker 1] Yeah, yeah, that's okay. It's better than a zillion people getting spammed, I think. Plus I've also had a stuff up with time zones where the website talks about UTC and it's actually CET and yeah, I'm just going to have to fix that very soon, like tomorrow, probably, before the next meeting anyway. All right. We've got 20 odd. We wouldn't know if it was from you, that would be case. There we go. All right. Now we're at about four minutes past. So there'll be a few other late arrivals, but I'll get started. So thank you all for joining the, I don't know which, how many UNTP meetings we've had now, but it must be number 40 or something like this. And thank you all for your time. This is a UN meeting where your contributions are considered your IP contributions to the project. So don't make any contributions you don't want to make. And it's also not a place to discuss commercial products and their advantage, just the standards that we're working on. Plus this meeting's being recorded and will be publicly published. So be careful what you say. But we're old friends here. So we encourage an active contribution. Here we go. A couple more admissions to do. Now, as you know, over the last month or so, we've been trying to transition from everybody on one meeting to four subgroups. And I'd like to kick off this meeting with a little bit of an update of what's going on with UNTP and RET49, but then hand over to each subgroup lead to set a kind of trend that from now on, I'll be doing less talking and subgroup leads will be doing more talking and talking about what their team have done in the intervening period. So I'll be introducing the three of four subgroup leads that we've got. And I'm hoping for a confirmation of the last one in the next day or two, which is the technical one. So on UNTP generally, we're busy preparing for the UN plenary in three weeks time, where hopefully recommendation 49 will sail through without objections. If it doesn't, and there are objections, then there will be a vote. And so we're also doing a little bit of lobbying of heads of delegation to make sure that if there's a vote, then it is a successful vote. So that's a little bit nail biting coming up. And we've also got, as many of you know, a couple of side events, just before the plenary, which is the third and fourth of July. On the first and second of July, there's a global digital collaboration, which is actually not a UNECE organized event. It's an Open Wallet Foundation led event, but with about a dozen or so co-organizers of which UNECE is one. And everyone that's in Geneva at that time is welcome to attend, it could be very interesting. A lot of about 2000 attendants talking about this whole decentralized digital identity infrastructure and verifiable credentials and how it applies in different geographies and in different sectors, including health and education and so on and so forth. So it's much broader than trade. But trade has a pretty good focus on day two for half a day. And we'll be talking about UNTP amongst other things there. So anyone hasn't seen that and wants to attend, let me know. It's on LinkedIn, and we can approve your participation. On other UNTP matters, thanks to the Responsible Business Alliance, we do have now quite active participation from the Global Battery Alliance and CatenaX to think about how can we all come together. And I believe that the Global Battery Alliance will be publishing an intent to develop a UNTP extension for batteries, which will be another extender on the list of four or fives that we've got now, which is good because an extender brings together their whole community with them. And GBA has obviously been leading the show worldwide for some years now on what is a digital battery passport. So that's good news. We also have an increasingly good relationship with the International Trade Center. For those that don't know who that is, that's a joint venture between WTO and the UN to provide tooling to facilitate international trade. So they maintain a thing called standardsmap.org, which has about 350 sustainability standards on it. And they're building tools and platforms for the GBA to help particularly smaller Global South actors to do things like issue facility records and product passports and stuff like that. So more like a lowest common denominator, common good designed for a large number of SMEs anywhere in the world. So they're a potential implementer. We've just had a discussion with them about them being a formal commitment to implement UNTP as well. So that gives more tooling for implementers to use. So it's all basically momentum building. So I'm reasonably happy about it, I think. Now, before I hand over to the various sub project leads, I had hoped to have a pull request in place by now, but I had too many meetings and didn't get to it, to create submitting pages, basically a structure on the UNTP site for each of the subgroup leads to publish their agendas and meetings and mailing lists and stuff like that. So I'm sorry I didn't get that done by this meeting, but I will aim to do it tomorrow and put on the Slack channel a PR for review. And when that's done, then the four people that are about to talk will have a place to record their meetings and so on. So as you may remember, the four sub teams are broken up into the following groups. One is conformity, and that is led by Brett, a logical person to lead that, a world expert. Thank you, Brett. And this covers the parts of UNTP, which are the conformity credential and the corresponding sustainability vocabulary catalog, because that's the thing that sort of publicizes or publishes the criteria that are referenced by passports and facility records. So that'll be Brett's domain. And then we've got Nick, who's volunteered to be Mr. Product, Passport and Facility Record, so products and facilities. And then we have Michael, who's leading the adoption working group that is about business case and about support, outreach, training materials, anything that has to do with increasing the user base of UNTP. And finally, there's a technical working group for which I don't have a lead yet, but I have a couple of promising candidates that I'm arm twisting, and hopefully we'll get them on board in the next day or two. And that one will focus on identity resolver, the verifiable credentials profile, and decentralized access control, if you like, the technical underpinnings. So we'll have all that in place. And then this meeting will just be summarized, summary presentations from the four team members, plus any collective issues we want to discuss. But we'll kick off with that pattern today. Before we move on to Brett or Michael, has anybody got anything they want to bring up, or any questions or comments? No? Okay, cool. Well, then, is Brett on board? [Speaker 2] Here I am, Steve. There you go. Over to you. Thanks, Steve. Hello, all. Plenty of familiar faces on the line. Many of you I've worked with for years. So maybe some of you could come and join our little conformity group. Why do we even want a conformity group, I hear you ask? Well, I think the key thing to realize is the voluntary environment in which UNTP is envisaged. Nobody is going to prison for lying about their product, unlike, say, a regulated, let's say, an EU digital product passport, for example. You have to tell the truth, otherwise you're in trouble. But in a voluntary scheme, well, you know, there's no obvious penalty for lying. What that means is that credible claims come from credible assessment of those claims. So that really, I think, is the basis of having a conformity group. So this new conformity group essentially deals with conformity assessment. Now, what is conformity assessment? It takes many forms. These forms include testing, product certification, management system certification, inspection, verification and validation activities. And all of these are formally defined. But if we start at the top, the World Trade Organization, we know that the WTO Technical Barriers to Trade Agreement, of which most countries are signatories, obliges importing countries to take into account demonstration of verified compliance with standards, with the keyword being verified. The accepted process for this is the world of conformity assessment, which is all codified through ISO IEC standards. And these are produced and maintained by the ISO Committee on Conformity Assessment, or ISOCASCO. And these are published in the form of the ISO IEC 17,000 series of standards. And incidentally, I'll be presenting on UNTP to ISOCASCO next week. So this formal structure for conformity assessment is also explicitly recognized by the World Trade Organization in the form of their own publication called Guidelines for Conformity Assessment Procedures. However, it is also perfectly true that a lot of current sustainability assessment occurs outside of this formal framework. And this is well reflected in the UNTP's approach of finding room for every process. And yet, the formal structures do exist, and they do need to be taken into account in whatever we do. And these generally do form the basis of assessments that would be regarded as high risk. There's just no avoiding that. Well, I've still got a few minutes, so I thought I would unpack the question of how the heck did we get here? Now, I've been involved in this space, I guess, for about four years. But three years ago, a new UN CFACT group was established, CFACT dealing with trade facilitation, of course. And this group was dedicated to the digital exchange of conformity data. And this resulted in 2023, in the release of a white paper, and then a year later, a business requirement specification. And this is what has provided the template for what we now call the Digital Conformity Credential, DCC. Not to be confused with the Digital Calibration Certificate, DCC. And these are not incompatible processes. I believe they're absolutely compatible. But if you come across two different readings of that acronym, there is a whole background to that. Anyway, that CFACT group was pretty busy for two years, and I would say at least half of the group would be regarded as conformity assessment experts. And some of them were quite senior. We even had the then chair of ISOCASCO in the team. Now, that group completed its work and they were dispersed after the publication of the business requirement specification. And they are now largely absent from this current UNTP group. So, from my point of view, the establishment of this new working group is a nice excuse, I guess, to re-establish connections with the conformity assessment community. And not excluding, of course, any other interested parties that are curious as to how conformity data can be exchanged or how it interacts with DPPs or the wider UNTP work. So, the new conformity working group is the, I guess, the new incarnation of that pre-existing group. And I have to thank Zach Seuss, who I believe, I hope, has agreed to be the technical editor for this group. Vastly important role because people like me can't be trusted to do much with IT. So, thank you so much, Zach. [Speaker 8] I think on this group, you are the technical expert. I'm just running the tools. I think we need to be careful about calling me a technical expert in the conformity space. [Speaker 2] Okay, all right. So, I might just share my screen for a moment to answer your question about what on earth are we going to be doing in this group. So, let me try and share my screen. Hopefully, you can see something. I've really only highlighted the first two dot points, which constitute our main role, I guess. One is to maintain the UNTP core digital conformity credential specification. And along with that are definitions and vocabulary. Maybe vocabulary is not the right word. They're more pick lists, I'd say, than vocabulary. But there is a second string to our bow, which is develop and maintain the sustainability vocabulary catalogue, SVC, specification. And this is where a scheme owner who owns a conformity scheme of some description or probably a certification scheme, they can define their criteria in a structured manner and referencing their own documents for the source of each criteria. There are a few other things that we're going to be involved in. Of course, we'll be maintaining the certifier implementation register, as well as the scheme register. There's a test harness and a few other bibs and bobs that you can see on that list. But essentially, we'll look after the DCC spec and the SVC spec, and I'm sure that'll keep us busy enough. Now, the date for the first, for the kickoff meeting has not yet been set, although it's not far away now, I promise you. I've been waiting on expressions of interest from parties interested in joining the work, and I did have a pretty good response to my LinkedIn call for participation. About 26 individuals contacted me to be part of this group, which I was quite happy with. And let me repeat that call today as my closing comment. If you are interested, whether as an observer or a participant, you are most welcome. I would love to hear from you. Let me know either in the chat or ping me on LinkedIn. I'd love to be involved with you in this, what I think is quite important work. Thanks. Thanks very much. [Speaker 1] Thank you, Brett. And I'm very confident Brett's going to do an amazing job there, because he did a great job bringing together some genuine global experts in the previous work of the white paper. And this is really a continuation to operationalize it and make it really implementable. So Phil's just said, can we please have a reminder how to sign up for the groups? The answer to that question, Phil, is I meant to have a pull request done for this meeting, which would establish some pages, sub pages on UNDP. [Speaker 3] Yeah. [Speaker 1] So when I've done that, that'll say, you know, sign up here. Meetings are at this point and that point, and we'll send out a notice to everyone that those pages exist, and this is how you sign up. [Speaker 8] Will do. Thank you. [Speaker 1] No worries. All right. So Brett showed the terms of reference and outlined terms of rest. There'll also be a page for that, by the way, so that you can publish it, Brett. And the next one I'd like to invite to say something is Michael Shea for the Adoption Working Group, where you're at with that and how people can join and why they should join. [Speaker 3] Yeah. [Speaker 1] Over to you. [Speaker 3] Okay. Thanks, Steve. Hello, everyone. Michael Shea. I've been part of this process for maybe a little over a year within the UNTP world. My background really is in implementations, but been part of the digital credential community since about 2017. But most of my experience is in either building or delivering or managing teams, running teams, delivering enterprise solutions. So, that's where my involvement originally with UNTP came in around the business case. What is the business justification? Not just a compliance regime while the compliance is there, and that helps eliminate the do nothing option. It really is important that we're able to establish why this should be considered a strategic move for organizations and not just a compliance exercise. So, starting with the small task force, I think last started last summer through about November, October, trying to work some of the content on the business case areas of the website. That is sort of our initial group that participated with this formalization of it as an Adoption Working Group. We had a sort of a kickoff meeting yesterday that the call went out at least within the UNTP community. I didn't think about posting it to LinkedIn, Brett, so I'll steal your idea there and subsequently post something to LinkedIn to ask for participants. That event has then set the cadence for the upcoming meetings. The first real working meeting, if you will, will be two weeks from today. It will precede this general meeting, so being in Vienna on Central European time. So, this general meeting is at 11 PM Central European. It will precede it at 10 o'clock, 10 PM Central European, and then it will follow the regular cadence. So, it will be on the Thursday. Well, Thursday in Central Europe. I don't know, maybe it's Friday morning in Australia. And then in the morning call, it will be after this call. Anyways, so while this ends at 11 AM Central European, the morning call will be then at that time. So, the adoption call will follow the general call. What we are working on in the next two weeks is to start putting our terms of reference together to define the exact objectives and what we could consider the Adoption Working Group. So, we're going to start with responsible for some good conversation yesterday. First, continuing the business case and polishing those. But then also, what Steve has alluded to, starting to create a pool or capable resources that can respond to inquiries that are coming into UNTP. So, it's not just all following to Steve or Zach or whoever, that we can sort of spread the load on how to work with organizations that are now looking to, that are expressing interest about what is this UNTP thing and how can it help us. Likewise, other areas that are likely to fall in, and this will be called out more clearly in the terms of reference, is around, okay, it's more of the business areas of how do things fit together. So, for example, with the European Union standardization effort, the ISO standardization effort, the IEEE DPP standardization effort, ITU's DPP, and then UNTP, and how does all this stuff fit together. So, trying to make sure that it's clear that we're not in a competiting, that these are complementary and to help the global community. Other key person that's part of the adoption group is Zach. As Brett mentioned, Zach is the technical editor as well for adoption, and I'm very appreciative of it. You know, my GitHub and some of those days are still a little bit very far in the rear view mirror. So, we'll help some of that process. We are in the process of setting up a mailing list. Right now, you know, in the absence of the list and the mechanism on the UNTP site that Steve's mentioned for joining, either DM me on Slack or send me an email. I'll put my email in the chat here if you want to join that group. Let's see. I don't know for anyone else who was on the call yesterday, did I miss anything that we talked about yesterday? [Speaker 1] I think you got it. I just put a little post in the chat there with five things. The business case, templates like letters of intent. You know, as we start to formalize commitments to implement or commitments to make an extension, we want to accompany them with kind of almost like terms of reference or letters of intent that, for example, UNEC would sign with extenders like the global battery alliance. These sort of tools, I think, are all part of adoption. [Speaker 3] Yep. To answer the question for Suzanne, yes, there is already the Slack channel. What was the UNTP business case channel has been renamed to UNTP adoption group. So, if you're a member of that, you know, you've automatically been made a member of the adoption group, whether you want to or not. But otherwise, that would be the other channel to make sure you're joining. [Speaker 1] Okay. So, that's an interesting one. Because it's the marketing side, right? And starting to track uptake and implementations and it's where value is released. So, I'm looking forward to that group really taking off. Yeah. [Speaker 3] And just one final thing. I was talking somebody in the textile industry just this week. And, you know, they're a vendor. And the key thing that they were saying is, you know, from information we were talking about is the why should they do it? They understand the compliance thing. But, you know, this CSRD regulation has been delayed. So, why should I bother? It's just compliance. So, these are some key things to keeping the ball rolling. Yeah. So, indeed. [Speaker 1] All right. If nobody's got any questions for Michael, we'll go on to Nick. [Speaker 4] Yeah. Pleased to meet everyone that I haven't met before. So, I will be taking the reins of the DPP, DFR, DTE acronym team. And I'm sure there will be loads more acronyms to come. I don't have the same kind of background as the other two leads. I am Australian as well. So, I apologize because there are a lot of Antipodeans in this group. But I'll claim that I have a Hungarian passport and have worked in Hungary, America and Malaysia. So, hopefully, I can relate to the problems of the global audience. My background is less, I guess, it's less technical from an IT perspective in here. But I've spent a lot of time in manufacturing and especially in the chemicals and fuels and then more recently in the low carbon molecular world. And so, a lot of that has been around energy management and all the calculations that sort of build up to a DPP. So, I'm sort of looking at the UNTP and hugely excited by its potential, looking at it as this sort of harmonizing structure that could really help to deliver a lot of the different disclosures that people in my world are tasked with. So, I'm kind of wearing my industrial hat like an ESG manager thinking I've got to disclose three, four, five different types of data sets on the one product. How am I going to do that? And how am I going to do that securely and confidently with my value chain? So, I definitely need some help in this sub-team from some technical folks. And that was part of the deal with Steve. I was very happy to lead the team as long as someone joins me to help guide me through that. I would say my kind of style and my background is I like to get my hands down into kind of application and practical application, very pragmatic. So, I tend to look for less, less is more often. And I tend to question, why do we need to add more stuff? Can we make what we've got work for what we need to do? And I look at the UNTP now and think that we have plenty that we can work with to deliver most of what's needed. But ESG managers, so I'm not about like new categorizations or splitting up and asking more of the tech team, but more deploying what we have. DPPs are a pretty dry topic, but we'll try and make it fun. But at the same time, we've got to stick to the intent of the UNTP. So, we'll be pretty strict on writing the intent of the working group out when we get together. And I guess the last thing I'd say is, you know, the reason I took this role is I've just been in awe of this group. I've only been involved for about six months. But the competency and the productive nature of what is going on here is really what's drawn me in. So, I'm really excited to get involved more in that culture that you've helped to create here, Steve. And everyone else, of course. So, yes, if you're thinking about implementing, you're looking at tying the UNTP to some legislative framework, whether that is voluntary or, you know, a legislated kind of government legislated framework, then I think this subgroup is a subgroup for you. That's my pitch, Steve. [Speaker 1] All right. Thank you for that. Yeah, yeah. A couple of things. I'm not sure if people realize that a document came out of the EU about two weeks ago that was a position paper that said, we've got all these different sustainability obligations like CSRDD and the EUDR and so on and so forth, and all kinds of different reporting mechanisms for attesting compliance, like due diligence statements and entering stuff on traces, which is the EU platform for biosecurity goods and import controls. And they woke up to the fact that actually the DPP is the carrier for all that. And so the EU themselves have just come out with a position paper that says, in future, we'll work towards using the DPP as the vehicle to test compliance or satisfy compliance with all of the regulatory instruments. So I thought that was quite an interesting thing to come out, because it's basically sharing the vision, isn't it? That the DPP is the carrier of all the claims you make about your product from all kinds of different dimensions. And why should I have to fill out 20 different forms when I can just give you my DPP? [Speaker 4] And that's a little bit of the perspective that I think we've been nutting through the first half of this year is, why can't we just use the DPP? And then I think the mechanics then become a lot around how many times is the DPP being reproduced and how are we managing the disclosure of what's in the DPP to the different audiences? And that's really what we're going to try and unpack and map for the different frameworks. [Speaker 1] And please don't apologize about lack of IT technical skills. We've got enough people on this team to help with that. What we really want is business subject matter expertise. As we move from the current state of UNTP, which is a minimum viable technical specification, to really testing that technical specification with real business scenarios. So that next phase is, let's test it against this regulation, against that regulation, against this commodity. Does the DPP work as a material passport for copper? Does it work for this and that? That's the stuff that's going to inform what's missing in terms of valuable content before UNTP becomes version one. And I think the team we're starting to pull together is just the right skill set to help with that. So I appreciate you putting your hand up. It will be some effort. And I think everyone knows that it's hard work. But thanks for that. If anyone wants to volunteer to help with the technical side on product passports, I think I just saw Suzanne possibly putting her hand up for that. Then please contact Nick and that'd be great. The last working group that doesn't yet have a lead is the technical working group, which is the one that's responsible for the ongoing maintenance of the verifiable credentials profile and the identity resolver and the decentralized access control. Not the digital identity anchor, not because it's unimportant to UNTP, but because that's shifted to the project that John is leading with Alina, which is the global trust registry. We get to hand that off to someone else to worry about and just use it from the UNTP side. I think the technical group would probably also be responsible for maintaining the overall test service suite. So when the business groups say, oh, here's a version 0.8 of a digital product passport and some implementer wants to try implementing it, we need the schema, we need the test suites. And so I think the technical group's job is to take the business content and also maintain an up-to-date test suite and test library that we can use. At the moment, I'm wearing that hat until I can give it to someone else. And the update on it is that the transition from version 0.5 of all the various artifacts, like DPP and DFR and so on, to version 6 is really a technical transition. It's fixing a number of technical bugs, making sure that vocabularies work technically, and that the sort of design pipeline from data modeling to published vocabularies and credentials and schemas and so on works more cleanly. So I'm pleased to say that some technical members of this group have been rolling their sleeve up over the last few weeks, and I expect to see a 0.6 release next week, which will lay the foundation of, okay, it's working technically now. And the various semantic web gurus that have said, hey, you've got your JSON-LD vocabularies wrong technically. We can finally say, no, I think it's right now. And we can build on that technical foundation now to actually add the right business content. And so it's just the right time for people like Nick and Brett and others to get engaged to, I think, take us through the last step to reach version 1.0. So that's it from me. We've got 20 minutes left on this call. So has anybody got anything they'd like to raise, or any comments, or any questions? [Speaker 3] Michael? Yeah, I just had a question. I saw an announcement that NIST is leading some working group. It's outside the context of UNTP, but what is the interaction? [Speaker 1] Yeah, okay. Well, I'll hand over to NIST for that, but just to give you a bit of context. As you know, UNTP depends on verifiable credentials as the kind of portable secure data carrier to give some integrity to the digital data. And we realize that the same technology works very nicely, not just for things like product passports and facility records, but for all trade documents, invoices, bills of lading, and so on and so forth. In the same way that we realize the digital identity anchor, which we needed to attach an identity to a digital product passport, is actually equally, if not more valuable, to link a strong identity to, let's say, the issuer of an invoice. So we're starting to pull apart some parts of UNTP and say, this is really usable beyond UNTP. So the verifiable credentials profile might even be a thing that we say, let's give that to NIST and take it out of UNTP because it applies across the board for trade documents as well. But NIST is leading, together with Sin Yong from Singapore, a project called, which has just launched, called VC4Trade, which is basically using the UNTP architecture, but not for product passports, but for all the trade documents that are part of everyday cross-border trade. I don't want to steal too much of yours, Ander Nist, so I'll just let you- Go for it. [Speaker 5] Go for it. [Speaker 1] Go nuts and say whatever you want to say. [Speaker 5] Yeah, well, I agree with that whole introduction. I might even say that, to some extent, the UNTP architecture has stolen from what we did on W3C with traceability vocab. So we're sort of building on top of something that's building on top of something. So it's sort of going in circles, getting better at every iteration. So we have a much better framework now that we developed with UNTP, and yeah, we're going to leverage that for the more traditional trade documents. The interesting thing maybe to also add is that we intend to base our requirements of the ICC KTDDE work that was conducted a year or two ago, which laid out logical data models for the core, what is it, 30, 50 trade documents. So those are really tangible and respected requirements. And really what we're doing is we're bringing those in and allowing people to express their trade data with scientist credentials and based on those requirements. So it's sort of everything coming together, and I'm pretty excited to dive into that. We're still pending on getting organized. Let me put it that way. Mailing lists, meeting schedules, and all that stuff. Yeah, we'll find time soon. [Speaker 1] I just put a link in the chat to the project definition for your project, Nis, which is basically as you described, to work together with ICC DSI and other definers of business rules to actually implement trade documents as verifiable portable packets, which I think is a really scalable way to do cross-border trade. One of the biggest challenges, just a little aside here, is when talking about verifiable credentials, I think we do ourselves a disservice by talking about the technology instead of its applicability to business problems, right? And I often get the complaint, oh, it's a bit early days, new tech stuff. Let's stick to the old stuff like API exchange. Nothing wrong with API exchange, but it doesn't scale very well to many to many environments. It works beautifully if you've got a popular service like Google Maps and everybody consumes the Google API. But if you've got a million businesses that need to send invoices to a million other businesses, getting IT departments to connect systems via APIs before you can trade is obviously not a very practical proposition. But getting businesses to issue those invoices as human readable and digitally verifiable credentials that can be human digitally consumed means the data exchange isn't going from system to system. It's going from system to trade environment, could be an email exchange to system. And it's much more scalable. So I really hope that we can switch that light bulb on and really accelerate digitalization of regular global trade, because we've been at it for, what, I don't know, 30 years or 40 years since any fact first came out. And I reckon less than 10% of global trade exchanges are digitalized today. And it's not because you can't trade digital documents, it's because this isn't really a scalable way to exchange them, and a trusted way to exchange them. So I'm quite excited about Nis' project. Anyway, thanks for that, Nis. We'll help you get all the getting started going soon. And there's a question there, does this align to the ICC? Absolutely, it does. In fact, the reason the project has taken a few months to actually get started is because of collaboration with the ICC to make sure we're going to work effectively together and not compete. And so they'll be putting team members on Nis' project. And it's definitely a collaboration, not a competition with ICC, to answer David's comment. All right. Well, you know, we could always give people 15 minutes back if nobody's got any further comments or questions. [Speaker 2] Go ahead, Brett. I had my hand up real high. Oh, sorry. So Nis mentioned the good work of ICC. He really means ICC DSI, Digital Standards Institute, I think they're called. We know Pamela and Hannah doing great work and good collaboration with UNECE. But someone sent me a policy brief from the parent organisation, the ICC, International Chamber of Commerce, and it's called Data Flows in Supply Chains. And it's sort of cast so broadly that it would appear to cross over into some of their work, but certainly doesn't take the trouble to acknowledge our efforts or anyone else's, seemingly. I just want to make sure that the right hand knows what the left hand's doing on that front. [Speaker 1] That sounds like a question for the ICC rather than us, but we're definitely happy to ask it. But it's not unsurprising when you get a left hand not knowing what the right hand's doing in big organisations. [Speaker 4] Brett, one aspect of that is there might be like a left finger and a right finger. I heard from one of my contacts around a carbon framework that they're looking at, which sounded very similar to sort of competing carbon DPP type entries. So I've just listed that on here for us to take a look at that in the DPP sub-team. Because we've got two contacts here that we can feed suggestions into if we feel like it is really duplication, or if there are some fatal flaws on either side of the model. [Speaker 1] Yeah. Okay. Well, that's four subgroups in UNTP and two separate, very interesting projects, one led by John around global trust registry and digital identity anchors, and one led by John and Alina, and Nis and Sinyong on VC4Trade. So lots of cool stuff to get engaged in, and everyone will have to figure out what's most important to them, right? Because you probably don't want to attend six meetings every fortnight. But we'll keep everyone informed and look forward to your participation where relevant, and where you're interested. And let's give everyone 12 minutes back, shall we? And say thank you very much, and see you in two weeks time, where we will have more formalized these four groups, and they should have, some have kicked off and some others will remain to kick off. Each one of you who leads needs a terms of reference a bit like Brett's one, right? And we'll help you to put that together over the next week or so. [Speaker 4] Yep. [Speaker 1] Sounds good. All right. Cheers. Thank you. Bye. See you. [Speaker 7] Thanks everyone. [Speaker 1] Ah, Phil, are you still here? I just remembered. Phil had a question. I don't know, he's gone. Never mind. I'll bring it up separately. Okay. Cool. [Speaker 6] Susanne, are you still there? [Speaker 1] Yep. [Speaker 6] I would want to comment on the resolving for digital product passports, but I'm not managing to get this into GitHub. So I don't know what to do. [Speaker 1] Okay. Well, that would be the technical working group, which is me until I hand it over. So we can just chat about it, and I can either empower you to make a pull request or a change, or do it based on a conversation. [Speaker 6] But does that mean I'm not empowered to, or I'm not allowed to? [Speaker 1] You should be. [Speaker 6] Yeah, I've done it before, but it's not the steps that Nis showed me are not working. So I don't know what to do. [Speaker 1] Okay. Is that the click the edit button, and it doesn't work? [Speaker 6] Yeah. Yeah. [Speaker 1] Okay. [Speaker 6] There is no edit button. [Speaker 1] Okay. I don't know the answer, but you should be empowered there. And so let me take it as an action to figure out what's going wrong. [Speaker 6] Maybe it's also because of my many email addresses and accounts. [Speaker 1] So- Maybe, right? So maybe you've got different GitHub accounts, and you're logged in with the wrong one or something. So let me know which GitHub account you want to be the empowered one, if you've got more than one, and we'll make sure that it's got the right permissions. [Speaker 6] Super. Super. I'll send you that. [Speaker 1] All right. [Speaker 6] Okay, Steve. [Speaker 1] Cool. Thank you. [Speaker 6] See you soon. Bye-bye. [Speaker 1] Yeah. [Speaker 6] Bye.