[OIDFSC] FW: Proposal to create the TX working group
David Recordon
recordond at gmail.com
Tue Jan 20 20:59:23 UTC 2009
3pm Pacific works for me on the 21st. I'll update my Doodle response.
Thanks!
---
Sent from my iPhone Classic.
On Jan 20, 2009, at 9:59 AM, Tatsuki Sakushima <tatsuki at nri.com> wrote:
> I temporarily add 3:00pm of 21st. When Mike or David suggest the
> time good for them,
> I'll update it.
>
> Tatsuki
>
> Tatsuki Sakushima
> NRI Pacific - Nomura Research Institute America, Inc.
>
> (1/19/09 5:30 PM), Nat Sakimura wrote:
>> What time woud be good then?
>>
>> =nat
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 5:45 AM, Mike Jones <Michael.Jones at microsoft.com
>> <mailto:Michael.Jones at microsoft.com>> wrote:
>>
>> I could do some other times that day but not that hour.
>>
>> -- Mike
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: specs-council-bounces at openid.net
>> <mailto:specs-council-bounces at openid.net>
>> [mailto:specs-council-bounces at openid.net
>> <mailto:specs-council-bounces at openid.net>] On Behalf Of Drummond
>> Reed
>> Sent: Sunday, January 18, 2009 8:43 PM
>> To: 'Nat Sakimura'; 'David Recordon'; 'Tatsuki Sakushima'
>> Cc: specs-council at openid.net <mailto:specs-council at openid.net>
>> Subject: Re: [OIDFSC] FW: Proposal to create the TX working group
>>
>> Right now I could do the 21st at 15:00PST.
>>
>> =Drummond
>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: specs-council-bounces at openid.net
>> <mailto:specs-council-bounces at openid.net> [mailto:specs-council-
>> <mailto:specs-council->
>>> bounces at openid.net <mailto:bounces at openid.net>] On Behalf Of Nat
>> Sakimura
>>> Sent: Sunday, January 18, 2009 6:45 PM
>>> To: David Recordon; Tatsuki Sakushima
>>> Cc: specs-council at openid.net <mailto:specs-council at openid.net>
>>> Subject: Re: [OIDFSC] FW: Proposal to create the TX working group
>>>
>>> What about other people for 21st 15:00 PST?
>>>
>>> Tatsuki, could you add that date to the doodle poll as well?
>>>
>>> =nat
>>>
>>> --------------------------------------------------
>>> From: "David Recordon" <recordond at gmail.com
>> <mailto:recordond at gmail.com>>
>>> Sent: Friday, January 16, 2009 3:51 PM
>>> To: "Tatsuki Sakushima" <tatsuki at nri.com <mailto:tatsuki at nri.com>>
>>> Cc: <specs-council at openid.net <mailto:specs-council at openid.net>>
>>> Subject: Re: [OIDFSC] FW: Proposal to create the TX working group
>>>
>>>> Thanks, though neither of those times work for me unfortunately
>> but any
>>> time the 21st should.
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Jan 15, 2009 at 10:36 PM, Tatsuki Sakushima
>>> <tatsuki at nri.com <mailto:tatsuki at nri.com><mailto:tatsuki at nri.com
>> <mailto:tatsuki at nri.com>>> wrote:
>>>> Hi all,
>>>>
>>>> As many of you suggested using Doodle.com, I created the event
>> there:
>>>>
>>>> http://www.doodle.com/rat2s87iyeqxd79z
>>>>
>>>> Please update your schedule there.
>>>>
>>>> Thank you,
>>>>
>>>> Tatsuki
>>>>
>>>> Tatsuki Sakushima
>>>> NRI Pacific - Nomura Research Institute America, Inc.
>>>>
>>>> (1/15/09 5:04 PM), Tatsuki Sakushima wrote:
>>>> Dear the Specifications Council members (especially David and
>> Mike) and
>>>> the proposers of the CX WG,
>>>>
>>>> Upon the request by David, I re-schedule this teleconference to
>> the next
>>> week.
>>>> Please reply this message and specify the option that you
>> prefer. Based
>>>> on replies from all participants who intend to join, I'll set up a
>>>> conference bridge and email them the information.
>>>>
>>>> I suggest the following schedules as candidate dates:
>>>>
>>>> 1) 4:00pm on 1/22(PST)
>>>> 12:00am on 1/22(GMT)
>>>> 9:00am on 1/23(JST)
>>>>
>>>> 2) 2:00pm on 1/23(PST)
>>>> 10:00pm on 1/23(GMT)
>>>> 7:00am on 1/24(JST)
>>>>
>>>> In the OIDFSC mailing list, David already stated and explained
>> concerns
>>>> about the previous charter submitted by Nat:
>>>>
>>>> http://openid.net/pipermail/specs-council/2008-December/000045.html
>>>> http://openid.net/pipermail/specs-council/2008-December/000046.html
>>>> http://openid.net/pipermail/specs-council/2008-December/000027.html
>>>>
>>>> The group of the proposers(Nat, Drummond, John, Henrik and Tatsuki)
>>> gathered today to
>>>> discuss how to change the charter that does hopefully eliminate the
>>> concerns mentioned in
>>>> the messages from Mike and David. The updated version is on the
>> same
>>> wiki page:
>>>>
>>>> http://wiki.openid.net/Working_Groups%3AContract_Exchange_1
>>>>
>>>> Please take another look at it before the teleconference and
>> provide us
>>> feedbacks
>>>> so that we can discuss about the new charter.
>>>>
>>>> If you have any comments or concerns about scheduling and so forth,
>>> please let me know.
>>>>
>>>> Best,
>>>> Tatsuki
>>>>
>>>> Tatsuki Sakushima
>>>> NRI Pacific - Nomura Research Institute America, Inc.
>>>>
>>>> (1/15/09 2:50 PM), David Recordon wrote:
>>>> Hi Tatsuki,
>>>> I'm really sorry but it turns out that I must have mixed up my
>> days when
>>> looking at the times yesterday. I have a two hour meeting at 3pm
>> today.
>>>>
>>>> Is it possible to try to plan this call more than a day in
>> advance for
>>> next week?
>>>>
>>>> Sorry,
>>>> --David
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Jan 15, 2009 at 12:09 AM, Tatsuki Sakushima
>>> <tatsuki at nri.com <mailto:tatsuki at nri.com><mailto:tatsuki at nri.com
>> <mailto:tatsuki at nri.com>>
>>> <mailto:tatsuki at nri.com
>> <mailto:tatsuki at nri.com><mailto:tatsuki at nri.com
>> <mailto:tatsuki at nri.com>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hello,
>>>>
>>>> David and Mike Jones from the spec council responded for this
>>>> invitation.
>>>> David can join a conference call on the 1) slot, so I'd like
>> schedule
>>>> a call on the date below:
>>>>
>>>> Date: Thursday, 15 January 2009 USA
>>>> Time: 3:05PM - 4:05AM(PST)
>>>> 11:05PM on 1/15(GMT)
>>>> 8:05PM on 1/16(JST)
>>>>
>>>> TO ACCESS THE AUDIO CONFERENCE:
>>>> Dial In Number: 1 (605) 475-4333
>>>> Access Code: 199834
>>>>
>>>> From the proposers side, I confirmed that Nat, Drummond, John,
>>>> and I can join. Unfortunately Mike Graves and Henrik cannot join
>>>> because both of them are not available on the 1) slot but on
>> the 2).
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Best,
>>>> Tatsuki
>>>>
>>>> Tatsuki Sakushima
>>>> NRI Pacific - Nomura Research Institute America, Inc.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> (1/14/09 1:59 PM), Tatsuki Sakushima wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Dear all,
>>>>
>>>>> I suggest the following schedules as candidate dates:
>>>>>
>>>>> 1) 2:00pm on 1/15(PST)
>>>>> 10:00pm on 1/15(GMT)
>>>>> 7:00am on 1/16(JST)
>>>>
>>>> On Thursday, there is a XRI TC telecon that many of us join.
>>>> Therefore, I suggested a hour moved back on 1). The new
>> schedule
>>>> is below:
>>>>
>>>> 1) 3:00pm on 1/15(PST)
>>>> 11:00pm on 1/15(GMT)
>>>> 8:00am on 1/16(JST)
>>>>
>>>> Sorry for members in Europe. I might be hard to join it
>> at this
>>>> hour.
>>>>
>>>> Best,
>>>> Tatsuki
>>>>
>>>> Tatsuki Sakushima
>>>> NRI Pacific - Nomura Research Institute America, Inc.
>>>> TEL:(650)638-7258
>>>> SkypeIn:(650)209-4811
>>>>
>>>> (1/14/09 1:45 PM), Tatsuki Sakushima wrote:
>>>>
>>>> (The options of the schedules have the same number. I
>> send the
>>>> collection and please discard the previous one.)
>>>>
>>>> Dear the Specifications Council members (especially David
>>>> and Mike) and
>>>> the proposers of the CX WG,
>>>>
>>>> Upon the request of scheduling a call by Nat, I'd like to
>>>> invite all the
>>>> members of the spec council and the CX WG proposers to a
>>>> teleconference
>>>> to discuss how to solve the charter clarification and
>> scope
>>>> concerns
>>>> pointed out by the spec council.
>>>>
>>>> I suggest the following schedules as candidate dates:
>>>>
>>>> 1) 2:00pm on 1/15(PST)
>>>> 10:00pm on 1/15(GMT)
>>>> 7:00am on 1/16(JST)
>>>>
>>>> 2) 2:00pm on 1/16(PST)
>>>> 10:00pm on 1/16(GMT)
>>>> 7:00am on 1/17(JST)
>>>>
>>>> Please reply this message and specify the option that you
>>>> prefer. Based
>>>> on replies from all participants who intend to join, I'll
>>>> set up a
>>>> conference bridge and email them the information.
>>>>
>>>> In the OIDFSC mailing list, David already stated and
>>>> explained concerns
>>>> about the previous charter submitted by Nat:
>>>>
>>>> http://openid.net/pipermail/specs-council/2008-
>>> December/000045.html
>>>> http://openid.net/pipermail/specs-council/2008-
>>> December/000046.html
>>>> http://openid.net/pipermail/specs-council/2008-
>>> December/000027.html
>>>>
>>>> I think that the goal of this telecon is:
>>>>
>>>> a) For the proposers to clarify points of concerns
>> raised by
>>>> the council
>>>> and explain intentions of the WG.
>>>> b) For the spec council to provide concrete
>> suggestions to
>>>> make the
>>>> charter comfortable and reasonable to the spec
>> council and
>>>> the community .
>>>>
>>>> If you have any comments or concerns on this message,
>> please
>>>> let me know.
>>>>
>>>> Best,
>>>> Tatsuki
>>>>
>>>> Tatsuki Sakushima
>>>> NRI Pacific - Nomura Research Institute America, Inc.
>>>>
>>>> (1/13/09 12:15 AM), Nat Sakimura wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Tatsuki,
>>>>
>>>> Could you kindly set-up a followup call, please?
>>>>
>>>> In the mean time though, I would like to ask spec
>>>> council members for the response towards the answers
>>>> given by the proposers to your concerns. Any concrete
>>>> suggestion to make it acceptable to the spec
>> council is
>>>> also welcome. It's a wiki, after all.
>>>>
>>>> As to the "community support", it would probably
>> depend
>>>> on what "community".
>>>> The proposers are probably talking of higher value
>>>> transaction users, and if we do it in timely
>> manner, I
>>>> am pretty confident that it will have some
>> traction, but
>>>> it needs to happen fast. If we take too much
>> time, the
>>>> opportunity will go away from OpenID.
>>>>
>>>> =nat
>>>>
>>>> 2009/1/1 Drummond Reed
>>> <Drummond.Reed at parityinc.net
>> <mailto:Drummond.Reed at parityinc.net><mailto:Drummond.Reed at parityinc.net
>> <mailto:Drummond.Reed at parityinc.net>>
>>>>
>>> <mailto:Drummond.Reed at parityinc.net
>> <mailto:Drummond.Reed at parityinc.net><mailto:Drummond.Reed at parityinc.net
>> <mailto:Drummond.Reed at parityinc.net>>>
>>>>
>>> <mailto:Drummond.Reed at parityinc.net
>> <mailto:Drummond.Reed at parityinc.net><mailto:Drummond.Reed at parityinc.net
>> <mailto:Drummond.Reed at parityinc.net>>
>>>>
>>> <mailto:Drummond.Reed at parityinc.net
>> <mailto:Drummond.Reed at parityinc.net><mailto:Drummond.Reed at parityinc.net
>> <mailto:Drummond.Reed at parityinc.net>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> David,
>>>>
>>>> First, I agree with Henrik's comments (see his
>>>> separate email).
>>>> Second, to say, "I do not believe that it
>> currently
>>>> has sufficient
>>>> support within the OpenID community to
>> succeed", did
>>>> you see the
>>>> list of proposers for this workgroup?
>>>>
>>>> * Drummond Reed,
>>> drummond.reed at parity.com
>> <mailto:drummond.reed at parity.com><mailto:drummond.reed at parity.com
>> <mailto:drummond.reed at parity.com>>
>>>>
>>> <mailto:drummond.reed at parity.com
>> <mailto:drummond.reed at parity.com><mailto:drummond.reed at parity.com
>> <mailto:drummond.reed at parity.com>>>
>>>>
>>> <mailto:drummond.reed at parity.com
>> <mailto:drummond.reed at parity.com><mailto:drummond.reed at parity.com
>> <mailto:drummond.reed at parity.com>>
>>>>
>>> <mailto:drummond.reed at parity.com
>> <mailto:drummond.reed at parity.com><mailto:drummond.reed at parity.com
>> <mailto:drummond.reed at parity.com>>>>,
>>>> Cordance/Parity/OASIS (U.S.A)
>>>> * Henrik Biering,
>>> hb at netamia.com <mailto:hb at netamia.com><mailto:hb at netamia.com
>> <mailto:hb at netamia.com>>
>>>> <mailto:hb at netamia.com
>> <mailto:hb at netamia.com><mailto:hb at netamia.com <mailto:hb at netamia.com
>> >>>
>>> <mailto:hb at netamia.com
>> <mailto:hb at netamia.com><mailto:hb at netamia.com <mailto:hb at netamia.com
>> >>
>>>> <mailto:hb at netamia.com
>> <mailto:hb at netamia.com><mailto:hb at netamia.com
>> <mailto:hb at netamia.com>>>>,
>>>> Netamia (Denmark)
>>>> * Hideki Nara, hdknr at ic-tact.co.jp
>> <mailto:hdknr at ic-tact.co.jp><mailto:hdknr at ic- <mailto:hdknr at ic->
>>> tact.co.jp <http://tact.co.jp>>
>>>> <mailto:hdknr at ic-tact.co.jp
>> <mailto:hdknr at ic-tact.co.jp><mailto:hdknr at ic-tact.co.jp
>> <mailto:hdknr at ic-tact.co.jp>>>
>>> <mailto:hdknr at ic-tact.co.jp
>> <mailto:hdknr at ic-tact.co.jp><mailto:hdknr at ic-tact.co.jp
>> <mailto:hdknr at ic-tact.co.jp>>
>>>> <mailto:hdknr at ic-tact.co.jp
>> <mailto:hdknr at ic-tact.co.jp><mailto:hdknr at ic-tact.co.jp
>> <mailto:hdknr at ic-tact.co.jp>>>>,
>>>> Tact Communications (Japan)
>>>> * John Bradeley,
>>> jbradley at mac.com
>> <mailto:jbradley at mac.com><mailto:jbradley at mac.com
>> <mailto:jbradley at mac.com>>
>>>> <mailto:jbradley at mac.com
>> <mailto:jbradley at mac.com><mailto:jbradley at mac.com
>> <mailto:jbradley at mac.com>>>
>>> <mailto:jbradley at mac.com
>> <mailto:jbradley at mac.com><mailto:jbradley at mac.com
>> <mailto:jbradley at mac.com>>
>>>> <mailto:jbradley at mac.com
>> <mailto:jbradley at mac.com><mailto:jbradley at mac.com
>> <mailto:jbradley at mac.com>>>>,
>>>> OASIS IDTrust Member Section (Canada)
>>>> * Mike Graves,
>>> mgraves at janrain.com
>> <mailto:mgraves at janrain.com><mailto:mgraves at janrain.com
>> <mailto:mgraves at janrain.com>>
>>>> <mailto:mgraves at janrain.com
>> <mailto:mgraves at janrain.com><mailto:mgraves at janrain.com
>> <mailto:mgraves at janrain.com>>>
>>> <mailto:mgraves at janrain.com
>> <mailto:mgraves at janrain.com><mailto:mgraves at janrain.com
>> <mailto:mgraves at janrain.com>>
>>>> <mailto:mgraves at janrain.com
>> <mailto:mgraves at janrain.com><mailto:mgraves at janrain.com
>> <mailto:mgraves at janrain.com>>>>,
>>>> JanRain, Inc. (U.S.A.)
>>>> * Nat Sakimura, n-sakimura at nri.co.jp
>> <mailto:n-sakimura at nri.co.jp><mailto:n- <mailto:n->
>>> sakimura at nri.co.jp <mailto:sakimura at nri.co.jp>>
>>>> <mailto:n-sakimura at nri.co.jp
>> <mailto:n-sakimura at nri.co.jp><mailto:n-sakimura at nri.co.jp
>> <mailto:n-sakimura at nri.co.jp>>>
>>>> <mailto:n-sakimura at nri.co.jp
>> <mailto:n-sakimura at nri.co.jp><mailto:n- <mailto:n->
>>> sakimura at nri.co.jp <mailto:sakimura at nri.co.jp>>
>>>> <mailto:n-sakimura at nri.co.jp
>> <mailto:n-sakimura at nri.co.jp><mailto:n- <mailto:n->
>>> sakimura at nri.co.jp <mailto:sakimura at nri.co.jp>>>>, Nomura
>> Research Institute,
>>>> Ltd.(Japan)
>>>> * Robert Ott,
>>> robert.ott at clavid.com
>> <mailto:robert.ott at clavid.com><mailto:robert.ott at clavid.com
>> <mailto:robert.ott at clavid.com>>
>>>>
>>> <mailto:robert.ott at clavid.com
>> <mailto:robert.ott at clavid.com><mailto:robert.ott at clavid.com
>> <mailto:robert.ott at clavid.com>>>
>>>>
>>> <mailto:robert.ott at clavid.com
>> <mailto:robert.ott at clavid.com><mailto:robert.ott at clavid.com
>> <mailto:robert.ott at clavid.com>>
>>>>
>>> <mailto:robert.ott at clavid.com
>> <mailto:robert.ott at clavid.com><mailto:robert.ott at clavid.com
>> <mailto:robert.ott at clavid.com>>>>, Clavid
>>> (Switzerland)
>>>> * Tatsuki Sakushima,
>>> tatsuki at nri.com <mailto:tatsuki at nri.com><mailto:tatsuki at nri.com
>> <mailto:tatsuki at nri.com>>
>>>> <mailto:tatsuki at nri.com
>> <mailto:tatsuki at nri.com><mailto:tatsuki at nri.com
>> <mailto:tatsuki at nri.com>>>
>>> <mailto:tatsuki at nri.com
>> <mailto:tatsuki at nri.com><mailto:tatsuki at nri.com
>> <mailto:tatsuki at nri.com>>
>>>> <mailto:tatsuki at nri.com
>> <mailto:tatsuki at nri.com><mailto:tatsuki at nri.com
>> <mailto:tatsuki at nri.com>>>>,
>>>> NRI America, Inc. (U.S.A.)
>>>> * Toru Yamaguchi,
>>> trymch at gmail.com
>> <mailto:trymch at gmail.com><mailto:trymch at gmail.com
>> <mailto:trymch at gmail.com>>
>>>> <mailto:trymch at gmail.com
>> <mailto:trymch at gmail.com><mailto:trymch at gmail.com
>> <mailto:trymch at gmail.com>>>
>>> <mailto:trymch at gmail.com
>> <mailto:trymch at gmail.com><mailto:trymch at gmail.com
>> <mailto:trymch at gmail.com>>
>>>> <mailto:trymch at gmail.com
>> <mailto:trymch at gmail.com><mailto:trymch at gmail.com
>> <mailto:trymch at gmail.com>>>>,
>>>> Cybozu Labs (Japan)
>>>>
>>>> In short, my first reaction to reading your
>> email was
>>>> to think,
>>>> "Wow, here it is, the first example of OpenID
>> turning
>>>> into W3C and
>>>> IETF and every other standards organization that
>>>> turns into a small
>>>> group of insiders trying to control innovation!"
>>>>
>>>> Of course I think you, more than almost
>> anyone,
>>>> can appreciate the
>>>> irony of that thought - I believe it was to avoid
>>>> that very
>>>> situation that the OIDF was created, no?
>>>>
>>>> So if we DON'T want that to happen, I
>> think what
>>>> we need to do ASAP
>>>> is turn this into a constructive dialog
>> between the
>>>> proposers of
>>>> this Working Group and the Specs Council about how
>>>> the charter might
>>>> be amended to addess some of your concerns.
>> (I'm not
>>>> commenting yet
>>>> on your specific concerns, other than to say
>> that I
>>>> agree with some
>>>> and not with others.)
>>>>
>>>> I suspect email is going to be much too
>> slow for
>>>> such a dialog, so I
>>>> would suggest that Nat and Tatksuki set up a
>> telecon
>>>> between the
>>>> Working Group proposers and the Specs Council
>>>> members. I would also
>>>> suggest that before such a telecon, the Specs
>> Council
>>>> get together
>>>> and collectively list their issues with the
>> Charter
>>>> on the Working
>>>> Group Charter page. I have added a section for
>> this
>>>> purpose:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>> http://wiki.openid.net/Working_Groups%3AContract_Exchange_1#cSpecification
>>> CouncilIssues
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> It may be that all the Specs Council members
>>>> agree with your four
>>>> points below, in which case you can just wholesale
>>>> copy them into
>>>> the wiki page. However it is very important
>> that the
>>>> Specs Council
>>>> come to it's own consensus about the issues it has
>>>> with the charter,
>>>> because without that, the WG proposers have no
>> hope
>>>> of addressing
>>>> these issues, either with counterarguments or with
>>>> potential amendments.
>>>>
>>>> Listing the issues there also enables us
>> to have
>>>> a more focused
>>>> discussion than email alone by using comments
>>>> directly on the wiki page.
>>>>
>>>> =Drummond
>>>>
>>>>
>> ------------------------------------
>>> ------------------------------------
>>>>
>>>> *From:* David Recordon
>>> [mailto:recordond at gmail.com
>> <mailto:recordond at gmail.com><mailto:recordond at gmail.com
>> <mailto:recordond at gmail.com>>
>>>> <mailto:recordond at gmail.com
>> <mailto:recordond at gmail.com><mailto:recordond at gmail.com
>> <mailto:recordond at gmail.com>>>
>>>> <mailto:recordond at gmail.com
>> <mailto:recordond at gmail.com><mailto:recordond at gmail.com
>> <mailto:recordond at gmail.com>>
>>>> <mailto:recordond at gmail.com
>> <mailto:recordond at gmail.com><mailto:recordond at gmail.com
>> <mailto:recordond at gmail.com>>>>]
>>>> *Sent:* Wednesday, December 31, 2008 12:33 AM
>>>> *To:* Nat Sakimura
>>>> *Cc:* specs-council at openid.net
>> <mailto:specs-council at openid.net><mailto:specs- <mailto:specs->
>>> council at openid.net <mailto:council at openid.net>>
>>>> <mailto:specs-council at openid.net
>> <mailto:specs-council at openid.net><mailto:specs- <mailto:specs->
>>> council at openid.net <mailto:council at openid.net>>>
>>>> <mailto:specs-council at openid.net
>> <mailto:specs-council at openid.net><mailto:specs- <mailto:specs->
>>> council at openid.net <mailto:council at openid.net>>
>>>> <mailto:specs-council at openid.net
>> <mailto:specs-council at openid.net><mailto:specs- <mailto:specs->
>>> council at openid.net <mailto:council at openid.net>>>>;
>>>> Josh Hoyt; Tatsuki Sakushima; John Bradley;
>>>> hdknr at ic-tact.co.jp
>> <mailto:hdknr at ic-tact.co.jp><mailto:hdknr at ic-tact.co.jp
>> <mailto:hdknr at ic-tact.co.jp>>
>>> <mailto:hdknr at ic-tact.co.jp
>> <mailto:hdknr at ic-tact.co.jp><mailto:hdknr at ic-tact.co.jp
>> <mailto:hdknr at ic-tact.co.jp>>>
>>>> <mailto:hdknr at ic-tact.co.jp
>> <mailto:hdknr at ic-tact.co.jp><mailto:hdknr at ic-tact.co.jp
>> <mailto:hdknr at ic-tact.co.jp>>
>>>> <mailto:hdknr at ic-tact.co.jp
>> <mailto:hdknr at ic-tact.co.jp><mailto:hdknr at ic-tact.co.jp
>> <mailto:hdknr at ic-tact.co.jp>>>>;
>>> Robert Ott; Michael
>>>> Graves; Henrik
>>>> Biering; Drummond Reed; Nat Sakimura; 山口徹
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *Subject:* Re: [OIDFSC] FW: Proposal to create
>> the TX
>>>> working group
>>>>
>>>> Hi Nat,
>>>>
>>>> I read Josh's email as agreeing with Mike's
>> statement
>>> of:
>>>>
>>>> The OpenID Specifications Council recommends that
>>>> members reject
>>>> this proposal to create a working group
>> because the
>>>> charter is
>>>> excessively broad, it seems to propose the
>> creation
>>>> of new
>>>> mechanisms that unnecessarily create new ways
>> to do
>>>> accomplish
>>>> existing tasks, such as digital signatures, and it
>>>> the proposal is
>>>> not sufficiently clear on whether it builds upon
>>>> existing mechanisms
>>>> such as AX 1.0 in a compatible manner, or
>> whether it
>>>> requires
>>>> breaking changes to these underlying protocols.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> While you have clarified that you don't intend to
>>>> create a new XML
>>>> signature mechanism, OAuth describes a
>> mechanism to
>>>> use public keys
>>>> to sign these sorts of parameters. Signatures
>> aside,
>>>> as Mike said
>>>> other aspects of the charter seem quite broad
>> and it
>>>> is unclear how
>>>> it will build upon AX 1.0 and other underlying
>>>> existing OpenID
>>>> technologies.
>>>>
>>>> Given the draft charter at
>>>>
>>> http://wiki.openid.net/Working_Groups%3AContract_Exchange_1:
>>>> 1) The purpose of producing a series of extensions
>>>> seems too broad. OpenID was born on the idea of
>>>> doing one simple thing and we've seen
>>>> success with OpenID and related technologies when
>>>> they are made up
>>>> of small pieces loosely joined. OpenID
>>>> Authentication 2.0 broke
>>>> this rule in some areas and we're now seeing the
>>>> repercussions of
>>>> doing so.
>>>>
>>>> 2) In what jurisdictions are these contracts
>> legally
>>>> binding? Is
>>>> "arbitrary parties to create and exchange a
>>>> mutually-digitally-signed legally binding
>> 'contract'"
>>>> a justifiable
>>>> statement or should it be toned down? It
>> should also
>>>> be kept in
>>>> mind that since OpenID's creation it has been very
>>>> clear that OpenID
>>>> does not provide trust, but rather trust can
>> be built
>>>> on top of
>>>> identity. I'm not saying that OpenID should never
>>>> deal with trust,
>>>> just trying to understand if this Working Group
>>>> intends to change
>>>> how OpenID currently does not create this form of
>>> trust.
>>>>
>>>> 3) The purpose says that the Working Group
>> intends to
>>>> possibly
>>>> extend AX and create a series of
>> specifications. It
>>>> does not seem
>>>> prudent to give a Working Group the ability to
>>>> arbitrarily extend an
>>>> existing extension or create an unlimited
>> number of
>>>> specifications.
>>>>
>>>> 4) The Scope section is still not clear as to what
>>>> the Working Group
>>>> will actually be producing. I would prefer to see
>>>> the section
>>>> rewritten, maybe mimicking the structure currently
>>>> being considered
>>>> for the specification.
>>>>
>>>> As to if you wish to force this proposal
>> forward, I
>>>> do not believe
>>>> that it currently has sufficient support
>> within the
>>>> OpenID community
>>>> to succeed and that its broad scope
>> contravenes the
>>>> community's
>>>> purpose. This is why I'm really hoping that the
>>>> proposal can be
>>>> refined to something which will be successful
>> that a
>>>> broad community
>>>> can get behind!
>>>>
>>>> --David
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Dec 30, 2008 at 9:03 PM, Nat Sakimura
>>>> <sakimura at gmail.com
>> <mailto:sakimura at gmail.com><mailto:sakimura at gmail.com
>> <mailto:sakimura at gmail.com>>
>>> <mailto:sakimura at gmail.com
>> <mailto:sakimura at gmail.com><mailto:sakimura at gmail.com
>> <mailto:sakimura at gmail.com>>>
>>>> <mailto:sakimura at gmail.com
>> <mailto:sakimura at gmail.com><mailto:sakimura at gmail.com
>> <mailto:sakimura at gmail.com>>
>>>> <mailto:sakimura at gmail.com
>> <mailto:sakimura at gmail.com><mailto:sakimura at gmail.com
>> <mailto:sakimura at gmail.com>>>>>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi Josh,
>>>> To which statement did you agree?
>>>>
>>>> There has been a several things that has been
>>>> pointed out, but I
>>>> think I have answered to them.
>>>> For example, for XML Sig, I have stated
>> that this
>>>> spec is not for
>>>> XML, etc.
>>>> For modularization, yes, that is a possibility
>> but a
>>>> scope needs to
>>>> be able to cover a field that it requires,
>> even if it
>>>> ends up not
>>>> covering that field.
>>>> It is impossible to widen the scope though
>> narrowing
>>>> it down at a
>>>> later date is easy.
>>>> Unfortunately, I have not heard back any
>> concrete
>>>> response
>>>> for amendments. It would be more constructive
>> to have
>>>> those.
>>>> Also, if you are giving advise to the
>> membership
>>>> an recommendation
>>>> for not approving it, you need to state the
>> reasons
>>>> concretely.
>>>> It needs to be one of
>>>> (a) an incomplete Proposal (i.e.,
>> failure to
>>>> comply with §4.1);
>>>> (b) a determination that the proposal
>> contravenes
>>>> the OpenID
>>>> community's purpose;
>>>> (c) a determination that the proposed WG
>> does not
>>>> have sufficient
>>>> support to succeed
>>>>
>>>> or to deliver proposed deliverables
>> within
>>>> projected
>>>> completion dates; or
>>>> (d) a determination that the proposal is
>> likely
>>>> to cause legal
>>>> liability for the OIDF or others.
>>>> and should state why the proposal falls
>> into one
>>>> of the criteria
>>>> concretely and accountably.
>>>> Regards,
>>>> =nat
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Dec 31, 2008 at 7:58 AM, Josh Hoyt
>>>> <josh at janrain.com
>> <mailto:josh at janrain.com><mailto:josh at janrain.com
>> <mailto:josh at janrain.com>>
>>> <mailto:josh at janrain.com
>> <mailto:josh at janrain.com><mailto:josh at janrain.com
>> <mailto:josh at janrain.com>>>
>>>> <mailto:josh at janrain.com
>> <mailto:josh at janrain.com><mailto:josh at janrain.com
>> <mailto:josh at janrain.com>>
>>> <mailto:josh at janrain.com
>> <mailto:josh at janrain.com><mailto:josh at janrain.com
>> <mailto:josh at janrain.com>>>>>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Dec 30, 2008 at 12:17 PM, Mike Jones
>>>>
>>>>
>>> <Michael.Jones at microsoft.com
>> <mailto:Michael.Jones at microsoft.com><mailto:Michael.Jones at microsoft.com
>> <mailto:Michael.Jones at microsoft.com>>
>>>>
>>> <mailto:Michael.Jones at microsoft.com
>> <mailto:Michael.Jones at microsoft.com><mailto:Michael.Jones at microsoft.com
>> <mailto:Michael.Jones at microsoft.com>>>
>>>>
>>> <mailto:Michael.Jones at microsoft.com
>> <mailto:Michael.Jones at microsoft.com><mailto:Michael.Jones at microsoft.com
>> <mailto:Michael.Jones at microsoft.com>>
>>>>
>>> <mailto:Michael.Jones at microsoft.com
>> <mailto:Michael.Jones at microsoft.com><mailto:Michael.Jones at microsoft.com
>> <mailto:Michael.Jones at microsoft.com>>>>>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I realize it was Christmas week but it's been a
>>>> week and we've
>>>> heard nothing
>>>>> from any of the other specs council members on
>>>> this proposal (or
>>>> the other
>>>>> one as well).
>>>>
>>>> I agree with the statement that you made about
>> this
>>>> proposal.
>>>>
>>>> Josh
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> -- Nat Sakimura (=nat)
>>>> http://www.sakimura.org/en/
>>>>
>>>> -- Nat Sakimura
>> (=nat)
>>>> http://www.sakimura.org/en/
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Nat Sakimura (=nat)
>> http://www.sakimura.org/en/
> d nothing
>>>>> from any of the other specs council members on
>>>> this proposal (or
>>>> the other
>>>>> one as well).
>>>>
>>>> I agree with the statement that you made about
>> this
>>>> proposal.
>>>>
>>>> Josh
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> -- Nat Sakimura (=nat)
>>>> http://www.sakimura.org/en/
>>>>
>>>> -- Nat Sakimura
>> (=nat)
>>>> http://www.sakimura.org/en/
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Nat Sakimura (=nat)
>> http://www.sakimura.org/en/
More information about the specs-council
mailing list