[OpenID] Problems with OpenID and TAG httpRange-14

[Peter Williams]

Formally, I suppose, you use the specs list (rather than the general list). That "is" the WG - where specification topics are "finalized". I don't personally subscribe, being a generalist from a "standards adopting community".

This isn't IETF or W3C ruled group, note. Its a grass roots community - who defined their own working procedures.

At this point, I suspect you've already heard from most of those on the "WG" with strong views one way or the other - including yourself (as, now, a WG member!). Like in IETF, at this point its really up to you to politik. This may include paying consultants, hiring lobbyists, offering "stock options" ... to get the issue framed and resolved the way you want it done. Or, you do all this yourself, of course, through a campaign.

I rememeber "purchasing advocacy services" from an IETF WG chair... and a fair few journalists, too ... with stock options. Nothing improper in that (where, as in IETF, the community has formally adopted "non-disclosure" rules.






From: Noah Slater
Sent: Sun 3/9/2008 6:04 PM
To: specs at openid.net; general at openid.net
Subject: Re: [OpenID] Problems with OpenID and TAG httpRange-14


On Tue, Mar 04, 2008 at 05:08:19PM +0000, Noah Slater wrote:
> There are some issues with the OpenID specification and how it interoperates
> with URI redirects according to RFC2616 and httpRange-14.

Will any members of the OpenID working group care to comment?

Does someone know how to directly bring this to the WG's attention?

--
Noah Slater <http://bytesexual.org/>
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
general at openid.net
http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/general
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openid.net/pipermail/openid-general/attachments/20080309/d4bf5706/attachment-0001.htm>