[OIDFSC] Refreshing the OpenID specs council

Tue Jun 1 21:18:48 UTC 2010

+1

Allen

On 6/1/10 12:56 PM, "Breno de Medeiros" <breno at google.com> wrote:

> If others are in agreement, I would like to join the spec council. I
> have consulted with Joseph Smarr, Dirk Balfanz, and Eric Sachs at
> Google and they have encouraged me to volunteer.
> 
> On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 09:26, Mike Jones <Michael.Jones at microsoft.com> wrote:
>> At this point, we have affirmative responses from all but Brad and Josh.  I
>> propose that we now invite Breno and Nat to join the council to replace Brad
>> and Josh.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> I agree that Dirk, Joseph, and John all bring strong qualifications, but to
>> my knowledge, none have served as OpenID specification editors, whereas
>> Breno and Nat have.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Are there any objections to now inviting them to join?
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>                                                                 -- Mike
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> From: openid-specs-council-bounces at lists.openid.net
>> [mailto:openid-specs-council-bounces at lists.openid.net] On Behalf Of Allen
>> Tom
>> Sent: Sunday, May 23, 2010 6:05 PM
>> To: David Recordon; Mike Jones
>> Cc: Johnny Bufu; Brad Fitzpatrick; openid-specs-council at lists.openid.net;
>> Josh Hoyt; Dick Hardt
>> 
>> Subject: Re: [OIDFSC] Refreshing the OpenID specs council
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Yes, I¹d like to remain active on the specs council.
>> 
>> In addition to Breno and Nat, I also think that Dirk Balfanz, Joseph Smarr,
>> and John Bradley would also be really good additions.
>> 
>> Allen
>> 
>> 
>> On 5/23/10 5:49 PM, "David Recordon" <recordond at gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>> Yes, I will remain active.
>> 
>> On Sun, May 23, 2010 at 2:46 PM, Dick Hardt <dick.hardt at gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>> Yes, I will remain active on the specs council.
>> 
>> On 2010-05-23, at 1:04 PM, Mike Jones wrote:
>> 
>> As several OpenID working groups are being proposed, it would be good to
>> ensure that the OpenID specifications council is populated with people who
>> are currently active in specification development and have the appropriate
>> expertise.  Per this note
>> <http://lists.openid.net/pipermail/openid-board/2008-June/002989.html> , the
>> council currently consists of these people, who are subscribed to the
>> openid-specs-council list with these addresses:
>>   - Allen Tom  atom at yahoo-inc.com <http://yahoo-inc.com>
>>   - Brad Fitzpatrick  brad at danga.com <http://danga.com>
>>   - David Recordon  recordond at gmail.com <http://gmail.com>
>>   - Johnny Bufu  johnny.bufu at gmail.com <http://gmail.com>
>>   - Josh Hoyt  josh at janrain.com <http://janrain.com>
>>   - Dick Hardt  dick.hardt at gmail.com <http://gmail.com>
>>   - Mike Jones  michael.jones at microsoft.com <http://microsoft.com>
>> 
>> Can each of you who plan to remain active on the specifications council
>> PLEASE RESPOND affirmatively to this note in the next few days?  Otherwise,
>> we should offer the positions to other spec editors who will be active.  Nat
>> Sakimura is certainly one person who comes to mind, as editor of the CX and
>> Artifact Binding specifications, and also Breno de Medeiros, who is an
>> editor for the User Interface Extension.
>> 
>> To update your subscription to the openid-specs-council list, go
>> to http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-specs-council.
>> 
>>                                                             Thanks,
>>                                                             -- Mike
>> 
>> As a reminder of the role of the specifications council, here are some of
>> the relevant passages from the OpenID Process document
>> <http://openid.net/wordpress-content/uploads/2010/01/OpenID_Process_Document_
>> December_2009_Final_Approved.pdf>
>> :
>> 
>> 1.4  ³Editor(s)² means, for a particular Specification to be developed by a
>> particular WG, the individual Contributor(s) selected to coordinate
>> development of, and transcription of the work of the WG for, such
>> Specification, as well as (together with any other Editors for that WG) to
>> administer WG operation.
>> 
>> 1.5  ³Eligible Editors² means, as determined on a given date, all Editors
>> from current WGs and all other persons who: (a) were WG Editors at any time
>> in the two years before such date; (b) are alive and have provided and
>> maintained updated contact information with the OpenID Foundation; and
>> (c) elect to participate in selection of the Specifications Council after at
>> least seven days¹ email notice.
>> 
>> 1.6  ³Specifications Council² means a group comprised of: (a) two
>> representatives selected by the Board; and (b) five representatives selected
>> by the Eligible Editors.  The Board may select from among the current Board
>> members (or other appropriate persons, as determined by the Board), and the
>> Eligible Editors may select from among themselves (or other appropriate
>> persons, as the Eligible Editors determine).
>> 
>> 
>> 2  Specifications Council.  The initial Specifications Council, as of the
>> date these Processes are adopted, will be comprised of two persons selected
>> by the Board and five persons selected by the then-current OpenID
>> Authentication 2.0 Specification Editors.  The members of the Specifications
>> Council will serve for two year terms (although one of the initial members
>> selected by the Board and two of the initial members selected by the Editors
>> of the OpenID Authentication 2.0 Specification will serve for only a one
>> year term  as selected by consensus of the Specifications Council  so that
>> Specifications Council membership terms may be staggered).  There are no
>> ³term limits² for Specifications Council membership, and the Board or
>> Eligible Editors, as applicable, may re-select the same persons to serve for
>> more than one term (consecutive or otherwise). In the event that a
>> Specifications Council member failed to participate in the discussion of two
>> consecutive working group proposals, the member will be deemed to have
>> resigned, and new specifications council members who are committed to
>> participating in the process will be appointed to replace the member.
>> 
>> 
>> 4.2  Review.  The Specifications Council will review each proposal within 15
>> days after receipt and promptly provide notice to specs at openid.net of its
>> recommendation to either accept or reject it, together with a brief
>> statement of the rationale for its recommendation (including any findings or
>> opinions by the Specifications Council regarding the criteria for rejection
>> in the following clauses (a)-(d). If a proposal is rejected, it may be
>> modified and resubmitted.  The reasons for rejection will be limited to:
>> 
>> (a)    an incomplete Proposal (i.e., failure to comply with §4.1);
>> 
>> (b)    a determination that the proposal contravenes the OpenID community¹s
>> 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.
>> 
>> If no recommendation was issued within 15 days after receipt, the Proposal
>> is deemed to be accepted.
>> 
>> When the Specifications Council rejects the proposal, the Proposers may
>> submit the Proposal to a vote of the OIDF membership, in accordance with the
>> voting procedures in §3. When the vote passes, the proposal is deemed to be
>> accepted.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
> 
> 