Add governance process for use cases in TAA-WG #13
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This document outlines the governance process for use cases within the Trusted AI Agents Working Group, detailing definitions, roles, lifecycle stages, transition triggers, tagging rules, evaluation criteria, and review processes.
Added additional flowchart steps for governance process.
bumblefudge
reviewed
Nov 3, 2025
| | **Domain** | `identity`, `authorization`, `governance`, `policy`, `registry`, `attestation`, `trust`, `privacy`, `security`, `delegation` | Describes the primary technical or conceptual domain. | | ||
| | **Lifecycle / Activity** | `drafting`, `under-review`, `accepted`, `active`, `retired` | Mirrors the use case’s current lifecycle status for quick search or dashboards. | | ||
| | **Priority** | `p0`, `p1`, `p2`, `backlog` | Used during prioritization cycles to indicate importance or readiness. | | ||
| | **Cross-WG Links** | `toip`, `owf`, `nanda`, `w3c`, `ietf`, `dif-labs` | Indicates related standards bodies or overlapping scopes. | |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm unclear on what these mean/do-- does tagging a use-case with one of these mean the WG:
- needs sign-off from some subset/WG of these groups to proceed to a given stage?
- should (i.e. sets itself a reminder to) cross-post or email at a given stage to invite review/input from that org or some WG within it?
- is hoping to be a work item over there some day?
- none of the above ?
Particularly as this github tags are public, it's probably good to maket his super explicit lest viewers (from those orgs) jump to conclusions when they see that tag!
bumblefudge
reviewed
Nov 3, 2025
| - Initial Risk Triage & Screening | ||
| The WG team assesses for duplicates and high-risk flags, including trust-specific risks (e.g., Does the goal involve handling personally identifiable information [PII] or protected health information [PHI]? Does it lack "verifiable identity mechanisms" or risk untraceable actions, such as insecure token propagation across security boundaries?). Ideas with high-risk flags or unclear technical/trust value are rejected or returned for clarification. | ||
| - Prioritization Scoring | ||
| - Preference are for Simple As Possible |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
this line item is very confusing-- does the whole WG apply all 5 of these heuristics for each use-case, before handing final decision to the WG chairs, in addition to the prior scoring and flagging/heuristics? is this a separate step, or just a summary of what happens in the rubric outlined in the next section?
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This document outlines the governance process for use cases within the Trusted AI Agents Working Group, detailing definitions, roles, lifecycle stages, transition triggers, tagging rules, evaluation criteria, and review processes.