<HTML><BODY style="word-wrap: break-word; -khtml-nbsp-mode: space; -khtml-line-break: after-white-space; "><DIV><DIV>On Oct 28, 2007, at 12:33, Mike Jones wrote:</DIV><BLOCKQUOTE type="cite"><O:SMARTTAGTYPE namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" name="country-region"> <O:SMARTTAGTYPE namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" name="place"> <DIV class="Section1"><P class="MsoNormal"><BLOCKQUOTE type="cite"><FONT size="2" color="navy" face="Arial"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy"><O:P> <SPAN style="font-size:12.0pt; color: rgb(0, 0, 221); font-family: Times New Roman; font-size: 16px; "><FONT class="Apple-style-span" color="#0000DD" face="Times New Roman" size="4"><SPAN class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 16px;">I would be much more comfortable if the Voting Process was defined in this document. A change in the Bylaws voting which has to do with the Foundation will now impact Voting in the IPR Process. </SPAN></FONT></SPAN></O:P></SPAN></FONT></BLOCKQUOTE></P></DIV></O:SMARTTAGTYPE></O:SMARTTAGTYPE></BLOCKQUOTE><O:SMARTTAGTYPE namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" name="country-region"><O:SMARTTAGTYPE namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" name="place"><DIV class="Section1"><P class="MsoNormal"><BLOCKQUOTE type="cite"><FONT size="2" color="navy" face="Arial"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy">I would be OK with copying the voting procedures from the Bylaws into the process doc.</SPAN></FONT></BLOCKQUOTE></P></DIV></O:SMARTTAGTYPE></O:SMARTTAGTYPE><DIV>Personally I feel we should not over-codify ("ossify") things. Processes usually change, and need to change, once they hit reality, and all that usually happens with over-codified processes is that people ignore them because it was to hard to change the process. (Anybody ever worked for a big company? ;-)) I'd like to avoid the latter for as long as possible.</DIV><DIV><BR class="khtml-block-placeholder"></DIV><BLOCKQUOTE type="cite"><O:SMARTTAGTYPE namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" name="country-region"><O:SMARTTAGTYPE namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" name="place"><DIV class="Section1"></DIV></O:SMARTTAGTYPE></O:SMARTTAGTYPE></BLOCKQUOTE><BLOCKQUOTE type="cite"><O:SMARTTAGTYPE namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" name="country-region"><O:SMARTTAGTYPE namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" name="place"><DIV class="Section1"><P class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"><FONT size="3" face="Times New Roman"><SPAN style="font-size:12.0pt">2) The OpenID Foundation is becoming a Standards Body.<BR></SPAN></FONT></P></DIV></O:SMARTTAGTYPE></O:SMARTTAGTYPE></BLOCKQUOTE><DIV>I really do not understand why people get hung up on that term. If I sit down with my buddy and we agree how to move data between his piece of software and mine, we are essentially a standards body, in particular if we then make the agreement available publicly so others can implement it, too. As we might add process and rules to it, my buddy and I might eventually be an ANSI-accredited standards development organization with a direct avenue to ISO (a "real official standard"). In between there are many shades of gray, and it's not binary at all. It's clear that all OpenID-related protocol work is quite some way down that road already.</DIV><DIV><BR class="khtml-block-placeholder"></DIV><DIV>The proposed IPR policy and process changes the hue of gray a bit, I agree, but only a bit and in order to solve a particular, important problem that it on the critical path for many other things. So this is what we should do.</DIV><BR><O:SMARTTAGTYPE namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" name="country-region"><O:SMARTTAGTYPE namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" name="place"><DIV class="Section1"><P class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"><FONT size="3" face="Times New Roman"><SPAN style="font-size:12.0pt"><BLOCKQUOTE type="cite"><BLOCKQUOTE type="cite"> This is contrary to the Charter of the Foundation. The Governance of the Foundation did not anticipate being a Standards Body and the political implications of being a Standards Body. As a participant in the formation of the Foundation, it was very clear that we did NOT want the Foundation to be Standards Body.<BR></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></SPAN></FONT></P></DIV></O:SMARTTAGTYPE></O:SMARTTAGTYPE><DIV>As another participant in the formation of the foundation, I recall no consensus on the issue, which is why we settled for the time being on what we could find consensus on. </DIV><DIV><BR class="khtml-block-placeholder"></DIV><DIV>But that doesn't even matter. What matters is that the foundation is responsive to the needs of the community that created it, which is why we need to do what has been proposed here.</DIV><BLOCKQUOTE type="cite"><O:SMARTTAGTYPE namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" name="country-region"><O:SMARTTAGTYPE namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" name="place"><DIV class="Section1"><P class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"><FONT size="3" face="Times New Roman"><SPAN style="font-size:12.0pt">3) Many organizations will NOT use a standard that has not been endorsed by a recognized Standards Body. <BR></SPAN></FONT></P></DIV></O:SMARTTAGTYPE></O:SMARTTAGTYPE></BLOCKQUOTE><DIV>Absolutely. Certainly the OpenID Foundation has no plans at this point to become an accredited standards body (I think that is what you mean, rather than "recognized"). But plenty of mechanisms exist to fast-track "standards" of the OpenID Foundation to other organizations that are accredited, which we can use should the need arise; the proposal on the table does in no way subtract from that.</DIV><BLOCKQUOTE type="cite"><O:SMARTTAGTYPE namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" name="country-region"><O:SMARTTAGTYPE namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" name="place"><DIV class="Section1"><P class="MsoNormal"><FONT size="2" color="navy" face="Arial"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy">I'll also comment that, if this is perceived as a problem, I *<B><SPAN style="font-weight:bold">know</SPAN></B>* that OASIS (and probably other standards bodies as well) would be glad to take an approved OpenID spec and adopt it as an OASIS spec as-is.<BR></SPAN></FONT></P></DIV></O:SMARTTAGTYPE></O:SMARTTAGTYPE></BLOCKQUOTE><DIV>That's exactly the avenue that I'm describing. Heck, we could probably take it directly into ISO if we really wanted to ;-)</DIV><BLOCKQUOTE type="cite"><O:SMARTTAGTYPE namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" name="country-region"><O:SMARTTAGTYPE namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" name="place"><DIV class="Section1"><P class="MsoNormal"><FONT size="2" color="navy" face="Arial"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy">Dick's questions do bring up one of my own. How can we enshrine the notion that specifications should only be approved when there are multiple independent interoperable implementations of them?<BR></SPAN></FONT></P></DIV></O:SMARTTAGTYPE></O:SMARTTAGTYPE></BLOCKQUOTE><DIV>Mike: could you propose a number for the term "multiple"? And define "interoperable"?</DIV><BR><BLOCKQUOTE type="cite"><O:SMARTTAGTYPE namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" name="country-region"><O:SMARTTAGTYPE namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" name="place"><DIV class="Section1"></DIV></O:SMARTTAGTYPE></O:SMARTTAGTYPE></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV><BR><DIV> <SPAN class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: separate; border-spacing: 0px 0px; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; text-align: auto; -khtml-text-decorations-in-effect: none; text-indent: 0px; -apple-text-size-adjust: auto; text-transform: none; orphans: 2; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; "><SPAN class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: separate; border-spacing: 0px 0px; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; text-align: auto; -khtml-text-decorations-in-effect: none; text-indent: 0px; -apple-text-size-adjust: auto; text-transform: none; orphans: 2; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; "><DIV style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">Johannes Ernst</DIV><DIV style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">NetMesh Inc.</DIV><DIV><BR class="khtml-block-placeholder"></DIV><BR class="Apple-interchange-newline"></SPAN><SPAN></SPAN><SPAN></SPAN><SPAN><IMG src="cid:9173E289-5D6D-4850-B823-FDF7D115EF12@local"></SPAN><SPAN><IMG src="cid:5CC41088-A082-4AA9-8169-EFD940AF9ADA@aviatis.com"></SPAN><SPAN class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: separate; border-spacing: 0px 0px; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; text-align: auto; -khtml-text-decorations-in-effect: none; text-indent: 0px; -apple-text-size-adjust: auto; text-transform: none; orphans: 2; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; "><SPAN class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: separate; border-spacing: 0px 0px; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; text-align: auto; -khtml-text-decorations-in-effect: none; text-indent: 0px; -apple-text-size-adjust: auto; text-transform: none; orphans: 2; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; "> <A href="http://netmesh.info/jernst">http://netmesh.info/jernst</A><BR class="Apple-interchange-newline"></SPAN></SPAN> </SPAN></DIV><BR></BODY></HTML>