[Openid-specs-ab] Spec call notes 6-Jun-13

Nat Sakimura sakimura at gmail.com
Thu Jun 6 14:45:03 UTC 2013


One correction re: ballot resolution meeting. It will be just after the
comment and voting period.

In ISO, comment always is associated with a vote. Typically, technical
comment is associated with disapproval vote.
(Comment with approval vote can be ignored, but that came with a
disapproval vote must be addressed.)
In the ballot resolution meeting, we discuss the comment and the WG may
choose to accept.
At least we have to decide on whether we Accept/Accept in
principle/Reject/Note.
At the end of the meeting we again ask whether the member states reverses
the vote, and if it goes well, everybody who casted disapproval vote would
reverse their vote to reach consensus. If it were at the Draft
International Standard (DIS) level, if there were no disapproval vote, we
can skip Final Draft International Standard and publish directly as an
International Standard. We do not have to do another review period nor
vote, so it saves a lot of time.

Best,

Nat




2013/6/6 Mike Jones <Michael.Jones at microsoft.com>

>  Spec call notes 6-Jun-13****
>
> ** **
>
> Nat Sakimura****
>
> Mike Jones****
>
> Brian Campbell****
>
> Justin Richer****
>
> William Kim (Mitre)****
>
> Edmund Jay****
>
> Thomas Hardjono****
>
> George Fletcher****
>
> ** **
>
> John Bradley****
>
> ** **
>
> Agenda:****
>
>                Open Issues****
>
>                Implementer's Drafts Announcement and Schedule****
>
> ** **
>
> Open Issues:****
>
>                There are no open issues filed for the Implementer's Drafts
> ****
>
>                Nat raised a few minor issues:****
>
> ** **
>
>                Definition of Authentication****
>
>                               We will go with "Process of verifying that
> an entity is the owner of an identity"****
>
> ** **
>
>                Date of publication of ISO 29115****
>
>                               March 2013****
>
> ** **
>
>                Definition of Identity****
>
>                               We will go with "Set of attributes related
> to an entity"****
>
>                               (from ISO and ITU-T)****
>
> ** **
>
>                On the "formatted" address claim:****
>
>                               We will delete "It is the primary member for
> printing..."****
>
> ** **
>
>                Nat asked why JWT Bearer doesn't define an "Authorization"
> header****
>
>                               Brian responded that it's not necessary,
> because it's just used at the Token Endpoint****
>
>                               Mike agreed that we don't want to re-open
> the assertions specs****
>
> ** **
>
> Implementer's Drafts Announcement and Schedule:****
>
>                We will start the 24 hour clock after Mike applies the set
> of changes above****
>
>                We will not wait for spelling/grammar check changes****
>
> ** **
>
>                Comments will come in through the normal working group
> process****
>
>                For reference, Nat described the ISO ballot resolution
> process for handling changes during the review period****
>
> _______________________________________________
> Openid-specs-ab mailing list
> Openid-specs-ab at lists.openid.net
> http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-specs-ab
>
>


-- 
Nat Sakimura (=nat)
Chairman, OpenID Foundation
http://nat.sakimura.org/
@_nat_en
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openid.net/pipermail/openid-specs-ab/attachments/20130606/8a2b38a8/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the Openid-specs-ab mailing list