[OIDFSC] Refreshing the OpenID specs council
Allen Tom
atom at yahoo-inc.com
Thu May 27 00:24:57 UTC 2010
I think John, Breno, and Joseph all would be fine additions to the specs
council.
Since Breno is a security expert, he would be a good choice to help drive
security issues. Because of Joesph¹s work at Plaxo, he definitely has a lot
of experience with Auth APIs and services from a large number of providers.
I don¹t think we ever formally asked Joseph or Breno they¹d like to serve on
the specifications council. Are you guys both interested in filling the
vacant position?
Allen
On 5/25/10 10:14 PM, "Dick Hardt" <dick.hardt at gmail.com> wrote:
> Breno looks to have more breadth of experience, so I would give Breno a slight
> edge. They both work at Google, so no difference there. :)
>
> On 2010-05-25, at 7:28 PM, John Bradley wrote:
>
>> I am helping Nat but he is the editor. The closest I have come was the ICAM
>> profile, but that is not a openID spec.
>>
>> FWIW I think Joseph or Breno would do a fine job. A slight preference for
>> Breno because he is a fellow south American:)
>>
>> John B.
>> On 2010-05-25, at 8:42 PM, Mike Jones wrote:
>>
>>> That¹s my understanding of the process as well, David. It sounds like we
>>> may already have consensus on Nat. I hope we choose the remaining member by
>>> consensus as well. I would personally be fine with either Breno or Joseph
>>> for the remaining member. What do others think?
>>>
>>> For reference, the relevant definitions from the process doc are:
>>> 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.
>>>
>>> 1.8 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).
>>>
>>>
>>> Here¹s a start at an informal list of who the eligible editors are that
>>> should select the remaining specs council member, should we not reach
>>> consensus without a vote or more formal process.
>>> · From PAPE: David Recordon and I did most of the actual editing by
>>> my recollection, with Johnny Bufu and Jonathan Daugherty also listed as
>>> editors.
>>> · From UI: Allen Tom, Breno de Medeiros
>>> · From CX: Nat Sakimura
>>> · From Artifact: Nat Sakimura. Is John Bradley also an editor too?
>>> It¹s hard to tell from the spec draft.
>>> · From Hybrid: Dirk Balfanz, Breno de Medeiros, David Recordon,
>>> Joseph Smarr, Allen Tom
>>> · From AX 1.1: Allen Tom, Breno de Medeiros
>>> I may have missed specs and editors, and if so, others should speak up.
>>>
>>> I believe that the other specs are all older than two years ago and/or don¹t
>>> have current working groups, although I wouldn¹t be opposed to including
>>> input from editors of the older specs as part of a consensus-based selection
>>> process.
>>>
>>> -- Mike
>>>
>>> P.S. I added Jonathan Daugherty and John Bradley to this thread, since they
>>> appear to be eligible editors.
>>>
>>> From: David Recordon [mailto:recordond at gmail.com]
>>> Sent: Tuesday, May 25, 2010 9:43 AM
>>> To: Mike Jones
>>> Cc: Allen Tom; Johnny Bufu; openid-specs-council at lists.openid.net; Josh
>>> Hoyt; Dick Hardt; Breno de Medeiros; Nat Sakimura; Joseph Smarr
>>> Subject: Re: Refreshing the OpenID specs council
>>>
>>> Given that the UX Extension was never finalized, I think everyone is on a
>>> level playing field.
>>>
>>> The Specs Council is made up of two people appointed by the Board and five
>>> by the "Eligible Editors". The Editors are supposed to select among
>>> themselves, but can appoint other appropriate people as well.
>>>
>>> I'd recommend adding Nat and Joseph given that the Hybrid extension has had
>>> more deployment than UX and his experience editing other specifications such
>>> as Portable Contacts.
>>>
>>> --David
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 10:26 AM, 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
>>> <http://recordond@gmail.com/> > wrote:
>>> Yes, I will remain active.
>>>
>>> On Sun, May 23, 2010 at 2:46 PM, Dick Hardt <dick.hardt at gmail.com
>>> <http://dick.hardt@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/>
>>> <http://yahoo-inc.com <http://yahoo-inc.com/> >
>>> - Brad Fitzpatrick brad at danga.com <http://danga.com/>
>>> <http://danga.com <http://danga.com/> >
>>> - David Recordon recordond at gmail.com <http://gmail.com/>
>>> <http://gmail.com <http://gmail.com/> >
>>> - Johnny Bufu johnny.bufu at gmail.com <http://gmail.com/>
>>> <http://gmail.com <http://gmail.com/> >
>>> - Josh Hoyt josh at janrain.com <http://janrain.com/>
>>> <http://janrain.com <http://janrain.com/> >
>>> - Dick Hardt dick.hardt at gmail.com <http://gmail.com/>
>>> <http://gmail.com <http://gmail.com/> >
>>> - Mike Jones michael.jones at microsoft.com <http://microsoft.com/>
>>> <http://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
>>> <http://specs@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.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openid.net/pipermail/openid-specs-council/attachments/20100526/a9360048/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the specs-council
mailing list