[OpenID board] Topic for this week's agenda
Michael.Jones at microsoft.com
Wed Mar 12 20:42:31 UTC 2008
That's true, but those votes wouldn't qualify under the IPR policy and procedures for any of the significant decisions, such as starting a working group, approving drafts, etc. They're also not good enough for electing board members.
What are you proposing that these votes would be good enough for?
From: board-bounces at openid.net [mailto:board-bounces at openid.net] On Behalf Of David Recordon
Sent: Wednesday, March 12, 2008 1:21 PM
To: board at openid.net
Subject: Re: [OpenID board] Topic for this week's agenda
The community can always just have a lightweight version of voting.
Someone makes a proposal, others +1 it, boom done.
On Mar 10, 2008, at 11:41 AM, Martin Atkins wrote:
> Drummond Reed wrote:
>> Scott and Bill:
>> Per the thread below, the question of when we will be opening up
>> new Working
>> Groups for specifications is starting to come up. I'm not saying
>> there is a
>> compelling reason to do that yet for any spec other than PAPE (and
>> Trusted Exchange spec that Nat Sakimura and his team have
>> suggested), but I
>> do think that OIDF needs to take a public stance about:
>> a) The status of current WGs (to my knowledge it's not published
>> what WGs exist or are planned)
>> b) The process for community members to form a WG.
>> Can we put a short discussion about this on this week's agenda?
> It was my understanding that the blocker for this is that we have no
> voting system through which we can hold a vote for the creation of a
> Obviously that is in hand per our discussions at the last meeting.
> However, I guess we could discuss an interim plan to get the first few
> WGs up and running quickly. It'd be nice if these could be up and
> running by IIW so that the WGs can potentially present to the
> what they've been up to.
> board mailing list
> board at openid.net
board mailing list
board at openid.net
More information about the board