A group looking holistically across activities in all of Hyperledger's SIGs and WGs to identify potential projects that would include stakeholders from multiple groups.  Discussions about this are happening in ...

GenericCapital MarketsClimate Action & AccountingHealthcareMedia & EntertainmentPublic SectorSocial ImpactSupply ChainTelecomTrade Finance


Algorithmic Market Making

Spectrum/Infrastructure Marketplace
Use CaseArchive

Catalog in production ones

RF/RFP Questions

Create a template for SMEs to use



Link to functional & non-functional foundations.

  • No labels


  1. Great idea and valuable resource! Thank you David for creating it. Could we also add the Working Groups to this Collaboration Task Force?

    1. Alfonso Govela – I'm glad to hear that this looks like a valuable resource.  And adding the WGs to the grid is a great idea.  Everyone involved in the collaboration discussion is welcome to edit this page as you see fit, so feel free to add the WGs and add anything else that would be helpful.

  2. Hi all,

    Couple of quick points:

    1. Was not able to edit this page!
    2. Before we get sunk into projects, a quick survey of the ecosystem might be in order
      1. The foundational ideas that have to be tackled by any project (in any SIG) :
        1. functional: Identity, Smart Contracts, The concept of Tokens.
        2. Non-functional: Performance & Scale, Security, Interoperability
      2. We had hoped to address these in working groups, there was a white paper working group & a smart contract working group - Architecture, Performance, Identity working groups still exist, of this the architecture working group is the most generic to embody the cross silo approach. There was a Use case task force which had amassed a set of use cases. We have to revive that work and examine the Use Cases and their relevance today, it would be interesting to see how prescient or how off-base some of those use cases were. The requirements working group (now defunct) chaired by @Oleg Abrashitov was responsible. The original github has been removed by Ry Jones as part of a cleanup- references in 2016 05 19 TSC Minutes (interestingly welcoming Brian Behlendorf as ED)- Requirements G has been archived as Ry noted below- (https://github.com/hyperledger-archives/wiki-archive.hyperledger.org/tree/master/data/pages/requirements)- There are hundreds of use cases there...https://github.com/hyperledger-archives/wiki-archive.hyperledger.org/tree/master/data/pages/requirements/use-cases many of them are empty. Some of them are quite detailed. We need to separate the wheat from the chaff.
      3. The SIGs focused on business areas, of this Trade Finance, Supply Chain and Capital markets have special affinity as they are finance related. Climate Action and any other SIG interested in driving behavior or value through the markets (like the Media and Entertainment SIG) are also in this group.
      4. Some of the other foundational ideas that we have to address include provenance of which ESG and Climate Accounting are special cases as well as crypto-economic considerations (Climate Action, tokenization of NFTs and other related topics)- these also affect any attempts at remaking markets uniting digital assets and payment systems.

    I have created a page with comment.. Functional & non-Functional Foundations. I have also added three projects from CMSIG that are relevant....

      1. Ry Jones thanks for quick turnaround

  3. I also feel that the performance & scale group should work with architecture group and other SIGs to identify real-world scale problems and then possibly propose solutions. This task force could provide the platform for that collaboration.

    1. Haris Javaid you are also right, each SIG and WG has components, both foundational and functional, that could interact with each other to consolidate, from different mindsets, our platform for collaboration.

      Maybe Architecture WG v2 could build upon the structure of business models and use cases to connect in new ways available components, and to detect new opportunities for innovation.

      1. Yes, agreed. I am trying to relaunch/revamp the performance and scale WG. I have often come across isolated efforts on performance improvements and scaling possibilities, but the biggest challenge is how those efforts can be channeled into the appropriate groups (architecture WG or SIGs) to actually make use of them or collaborate towards a more practical solution.

        1. One possible way to begin Haris Javaid could be to categorize efforts and resources as foundational-functional, as Vipin said, then standardize an index page of such components at the top of each wiki of SIGs, WGs, Regional Chapters, etc, and cross-reference there links to other index pages. This homogeneous first page could be an entry point for the work of each community, and provide quick connection paths to traverse our complex wiki-space. (I confess that I don’t understand it)

  4. Agree with you Vipin, your quick points guide a foundational & functional base for structuring “Bridging the Silos”. Maybe an Architecture WG v2.0 ?

  5. What I am looking for is a library or taxonomy of sustainable data elements first. Tied to ledger entries these can be used to create sustainability reports. The use of blockchain can make these sustainability scores transferable over value or supply chain. At TrustFactors.org we are experimenting with this. We want to widen the scope from just financial reporting to other uses. Marketing or reputations for instance. A trusted transfer within a chain can only be done when entry or exit points are immutable stored. Is anyone aware of similar projects?

    1. Are there known schemas for this? ESG is such a broad topic. More than just the data items, we need attestations from auditors/suppliers/producers (preferably multiple independent sources) for these items to mean something. Once created, this trust has to transfer across chains/filter into higher level components created from basic components....

  6. Well, there are many working groups discussing high level taxonomies but none takes a bottom up approach where the materiality is pegged to activities or assets. None consider the intended and unintended impact, positive nor negative over the whole value chain. Is the carbon footprint of a product produced in China but consumed in the USA output for China or the US? What happens to waste or water pollution? The goal must be to create a transparant, immutable, trusted set of impact identifiers that will allow each and every company to show its efforts in a auditable way.

    1. Erich Schnoeckel – I would encourage you to share your feedback and ask your questions in our Climate Action and Accounting group's mailing list.  There are a lot of people there working through the points you raise.  In fact, the group just yesterday had a presentation about how to track the carbon footprint of a product by tracking the product's path through the supply chain.  The recording of that discussion is at:

      And to talk more with the group, feel free to sign up to their list and introduce yourself and share any feedback or questions.  You can sign up at: