[OpenID board] Fwd: [OpenID Foundation] New Poll Opened

Nat Sakimura sakimura at gmail.com
Fri Mar 20 01:00:11 UTC 2009

I do not think "take a look at the IPR Process in a holistic
perspective" was a consensus. To me, taking "at least a month" before
any concrete proposal would be too time consuming, since we have
already lost a quarter. There is a board approved 4 changes with
proposed text sitting there for a month, and to me, adding the 5th
one, which is Allen's proposal, is adequate. (Note, this change was
also incorporated in the current proposed text. A lawyer can review it
in a day max.) David opposed to that idea, so it was made an action
item among Don, David, and me to discuss and drive it.

That is the state of it.


On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 5:17 AM, David Recordon <david at sixapart.com> wrote:
> This was discussed briefly by the Board yesterday during our meeting and we
> plan to take a look at the IPR Process in a holistic perspective, looking at
> the changes that can be made to address how hard it is to get started.
> --David
> On Mar 19, 2009, at 1:10 PM, Martin Atkins wrote:
>> David Recordon wrote:
>>> Hey Brett,
>>> There is a 14-day discussion period once the Specs Council has approved
>>> the WG which occurs on the specs at openid.net <mailto:specs at openid.net>
>>> mailing list.  There was also a discussion on the same list leading up to
>>> the Specs Council vote on the proposal.
>>> I think everyone agrees that there are other user interface improvements
>>> to be made, though pop-ups are a good starting point.  I think we should
>>> address this once the working group is created and see if there is consensus
>>> there to rename the specification being produced.
>> Once again I find myself wondering why there is a vote to create a working
>> group. This is especially perplexing in this case where you seem to be
>> suggesting that after the group is formed it might decide to change its
>> scope.
>> Why can't we just let working groups be created and do their work and then
>> do the vote on the finished specification itself rather than on the plan to
>> create one?
>> All the current setup seems to achieve is that folks do most of the work
>> in other forums like the "step2" mailing list where the OpenID community
>> can't necessarily see it, and then they just go through the motions to
>> create the working group after most of the work has already been done. This
>> seems counter-productive.
>> _______________________________________________
>> board mailing list
>> board at openid.net
>> http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/board
> _______________________________________________
> board mailing list
> board at openid.net
> http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/board

Nat Sakimura (=nat)

More information about the board mailing list