Thanks, though neither of those times work for me unfortunately but any time the 21st should.<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Jan 15, 2009 at 10:36 PM, Tatsuki Sakushima <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:tatsuki@nri.com">tatsuki@nri.com</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">Hi all,<br>
<br>
As many of you suggested using Doodle.com, I created the event there:<br>
<br>
<a href="http://www.doodle.com/rat2s87iyeqxd79z" target="_blank">http://www.doodle.com/rat2s87iyeqxd79z</a><br>
<br>
Please update your schedule there.<br>
<br>
Thank you,<div class="Ih2E3d"><br>
Tatsuki<br>
<br>
Tatsuki Sakushima<br>
NRI Pacific - Nomura Research Institute America, Inc.<br>
<br></div><div><div></div><div class="Wj3C7c">
(1/15/09 5:04 PM), Tatsuki Sakushima wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
Dear the Specifications Council members (especially David and Mike) and<br>
the proposers of the CX WG,<br>
<br>
Upon the request by David, I re-schedule this teleconference to the next week.<br>
Please reply this message and specify the option that you prefer. Based<br>
on replies from all participants who intend to join, I'll set up a<br>
conference bridge and email them the information.<br>
<br>
I suggest the following schedules as candidate dates:<br>
<br>
1) 4:00pm on 1/22(PST)<br>
12:00am on 1/22(GMT)<br>
9:00am on 1/23(JST)<br>
<br>
2) 2:00pm on 1/23(PST)<br>
10:00pm on 1/23(GMT)<br>
7:00am on 1/24(JST)<br>
<br>
In the OIDFSC mailing list, David already stated and explained concerns<br>
about the previous charter submitted by Nat:<br>
<br>
<a href="http://openid.net/pipermail/specs-council/2008-December/000045.html" target="_blank">http://openid.net/pipermail/specs-council/2008-December/000045.html</a><br>
<a href="http://openid.net/pipermail/specs-council/2008-December/000046.html" target="_blank">http://openid.net/pipermail/specs-council/2008-December/000046.html</a><br>
<a href="http://openid.net/pipermail/specs-council/2008-December/000027.html" target="_blank">http://openid.net/pipermail/specs-council/2008-December/000027.html</a><br>
<br>
The group of the proposers(Nat, Drummond, John, Henrik and Tatsuki) gathered today to<br>
discuss how to change the charter that does hopefully eliminate the concerns mentioned in<br>
the messages from Mike and David. The updated version is on the same wiki page:<br>
<br>
<a href="http://wiki.openid.net/Working_Groups%3AContract_Exchange_1" target="_blank">http://wiki.openid.net/Working_Groups%3AContract_Exchange_1</a><br>
<br>
Please take another look at it before the teleconference and provide us feedbacks<br>
so that we can discuss about the new charter.<br>
<br>
If you have any comments or concerns about scheduling and so forth, please let me know.<br>
<br>
Best,<br>
Tatsuki<br>
<br>
Tatsuki Sakushima<br>
NRI Pacific - Nomura Research Institute America, Inc.<br>
<br>
(1/15/09 2:50 PM), David Recordon wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
Hi Tatsuki,<br>
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.<br>
<br>
Is it possible to try to plan this call more than a day in advance for next week?<br>
<br>
Sorry,<br>
--David<br>
<br>
On Thu, Jan 15, 2009 at 12:09 AM, Tatsuki Sakushima <<a href="mailto:tatsuki@nri.com" target="_blank">tatsuki@nri.com</a> <mailto:<a href="mailto:tatsuki@nri.com" target="_blank">tatsuki@nri.com</a>>> wrote:<br>
<br>
Hello,<br>
<br>
David and Mike Jones from the spec council responded for this<br>
invitation.<br>
David can join a conference call on the 1) slot, so I'd like schedule<br>
a call on the date below:<br>
<br>
Date: Thursday, 15 January 2009 USA<br>
Time: 3:05PM - 4:05AM(PST)<br>
11:05PM on 1/15(GMT)<br>
8:05PM on 1/16(JST)<br>
<br>
TO ACCESS THE AUDIO CONFERENCE:<br>
Dial In Number: 1 (605) 475-4333<br>
Access Code: 199834<br>
<br>
From the proposers side, I confirmed that Nat, Drummond, John,<br>
and I can join. Unfortunately Mike Graves and Henrik cannot join<br>
because both of them are not available on the 1) slot but on the 2).<br>
<br>
<br>
Best,<br>
Tatsuki<br>
<br>
Tatsuki Sakushima<br>
NRI Pacific - Nomura Research Institute America, Inc.<br>
<br>
<br>
(1/14/09 1:59 PM), Tatsuki Sakushima wrote:<br>
<br>
Dear all,<br>
<br>
> I suggest the following schedules as candidate dates:<br>
><br>
> 1) 2:00pm on 1/15(PST)<br>
> 10:00pm on 1/15(GMT)<br>
> 7:00am on 1/16(JST)<br>
<br>
On Thursday, there is a XRI TC telecon that many of us join.<br>
Therefore, I suggested a hour moved back on 1). The new schedule<br>
is below:<br>
<br>
1) 3:00pm on 1/15(PST)<br>
11:00pm on 1/15(GMT)<br>
8:00am on 1/16(JST)<br>
<br>
Sorry for members in Europe. I might be hard to join it at this<br>
hour.<br>
<br>
Best,<br>
Tatsuki<br>
<br>
Tatsuki Sakushima<br>
NRI Pacific - Nomura Research Institute America, Inc.<br>
TEL:(650)638-7258<br>
SkypeIn:(650)209-4811<br>
<br>
(1/14/09 1:45 PM), Tatsuki Sakushima wrote:<br>
<br>
(The options of the schedules have the same number. I send the<br>
collection and please discard the previous one.)<br>
<br>
Dear the Specifications Council members (especially David<br>
and Mike) and<br>
the proposers of the CX WG,<br>
<br>
Upon the request of scheduling a call by Nat, I'd like to<br>
invite all the<br>
members of the spec council and the CX WG proposers to a<br>
teleconference<br>
to discuss how to solve the charter clarification and scope<br>
concerns<br>
pointed out by the spec council.<br>
<br>
I suggest the following schedules as candidate dates:<br>
<br>
1) 2:00pm on 1/15(PST)<br>
10:00pm on 1/15(GMT)<br>
7:00am on 1/16(JST)<br>
<br>
2) 2:00pm on 1/16(PST)<br>
10:00pm on 1/16(GMT)<br>
7:00am on 1/17(JST)<br>
<br>
Please reply this message and specify the option that you<br>
prefer. Based<br>
on replies from all participants who intend to join, I'll<br>
set up a<br>
conference bridge and email them the information.<br>
<br>
In the OIDFSC mailing list, David already stated and<br>
explained concerns<br>
about the previous charter submitted by Nat:<br>
<br>
<a href="http://openid.net/pipermail/specs-council/2008-December/000045.html" target="_blank">http://openid.net/pipermail/specs-council/2008-December/000045.html</a><br>
<a href="http://openid.net/pipermail/specs-council/2008-December/000046.html" target="_blank">http://openid.net/pipermail/specs-council/2008-December/000046.html</a><br>
<a href="http://openid.net/pipermail/specs-council/2008-December/000027.html" target="_blank">http://openid.net/pipermail/specs-council/2008-December/000027.html</a><br>
<br>
I think that the goal of this telecon is:<br>
<br>
a) For the proposers to clarify points of concerns raised by<br>
the council<br>
and explain intentions of the WG.<br>
b) For the spec council to provide concrete suggestions to<br>
make the<br>
charter comfortable and reasonable to the spec council and<br>
the community .<br>
<br>
If you have any comments or concerns on this message, please<br>
let me know.<br>
<br>
Best,<br>
Tatsuki<br>
<br>
Tatsuki Sakushima<br>
NRI Pacific - Nomura Research Institute America, Inc.<br>
<br>
(1/13/09 12:15 AM), Nat Sakimura wrote:<br>
<br>
Tatsuki,<br>
<br>
Could you kindly set-up a followup call, please?<br>
<br>
In the mean time though, I would like to ask spec<br>
council members for the response towards the answers<br>
given by the proposers to your concerns. Any concrete<br>
suggestion to make it acceptable to the spec council is<br>
also welcome. It's a wiki, after all.<br>
<br>
As to the "community support", it would probably depend<br>
on what "community".<br>
The proposers are probably talking of higher value<br>
transaction users, and if we do it in timely manner, I<br>
am pretty confident that it will have some traction, but<br>
it needs to happen fast. If we take too much time, the<br>
opportunity will go away from OpenID.<br>
<br>
=nat<br>
<br>
2009/1/1 Drummond Reed <<a href="mailto:Drummond.Reed@parityinc.net" target="_blank">Drummond.Reed@parityinc.net</a><br>
<mailto:<a href="mailto:Drummond.Reed@parityinc.net" target="_blank">Drummond.Reed@parityinc.net</a>><br>
<mailto:<a href="mailto:Drummond.Reed@parityinc.net" target="_blank">Drummond.Reed@parityinc.net</a><br>
<mailto:<a href="mailto:Drummond.Reed@parityinc.net" target="_blank">Drummond.Reed@parityinc.net</a>>>><br>
<br>
David,<br>
<br>
First, I agree with Henrik's comments (see his<br>
separate email).<br>
Second, to say, "I do not believe that it currently<br>
has sufficient<br>
support within the OpenID community to succeed", did<br>
you see the<br>
list of proposers for this workgroup?<br>
<br>
* Drummond Reed, <a href="mailto:drummond.reed@parity.com" target="_blank">drummond.reed@parity.com</a><br>
<mailto:<a href="mailto:drummond.reed@parity.com" target="_blank">drummond.reed@parity.com</a>><br>
<mailto:<a href="mailto:drummond.reed@parity.com" target="_blank">drummond.reed@parity.com</a><br>
<mailto:<a href="mailto:drummond.reed@parity.com" target="_blank">drummond.reed@parity.com</a>>>,<br>
Cordance/Parity/OASIS (U.S.A)<br>
* Henrik Biering, <a href="mailto:hb@netamia.com" target="_blank">hb@netamia.com</a><br>
<mailto:<a href="mailto:hb@netamia.com" target="_blank">hb@netamia.com</a>> <mailto:<a href="mailto:hb@netamia.com" target="_blank">hb@netamia.com</a><br>
<mailto:<a href="mailto:hb@netamia.com" target="_blank">hb@netamia.com</a>>>,<br>
Netamia (Denmark)<br>
* Hideki Nara, <a href="mailto:hdknr@ic-tact.co.jp" target="_blank">hdknr@ic-tact.co.jp</a><br>
<mailto:<a href="mailto:hdknr@ic-tact.co.jp" target="_blank">hdknr@ic-tact.co.jp</a>> <mailto:<a href="mailto:hdknr@ic-tact.co.jp" target="_blank">hdknr@ic-tact.co.jp</a><br>
<mailto:<a href="mailto:hdknr@ic-tact.co.jp" target="_blank">hdknr@ic-tact.co.jp</a>>>,<br>
Tact Communications (Japan)<br>
* John Bradeley, <a href="mailto:jbradley@mac.com" target="_blank">jbradley@mac.com</a><br>
<mailto:<a href="mailto:jbradley@mac.com" target="_blank">jbradley@mac.com</a>> <mailto:<a href="mailto:jbradley@mac.com" target="_blank">jbradley@mac.com</a><br>
<mailto:<a href="mailto:jbradley@mac.com" target="_blank">jbradley@mac.com</a>>>,<br>
OASIS IDTrust Member Section (Canada)<br>
* Mike Graves, <a href="mailto:mgraves@janrain.com" target="_blank">mgraves@janrain.com</a><br>
<mailto:<a href="mailto:mgraves@janrain.com" target="_blank">mgraves@janrain.com</a>> <mailto:<a href="mailto:mgraves@janrain.com" target="_blank">mgraves@janrain.com</a><br>
<mailto:<a href="mailto:mgraves@janrain.com" target="_blank">mgraves@janrain.com</a>>>,<br>
JanRain, Inc. (U.S.A.)<br>
* Nat Sakimura, <a href="mailto:n-sakimura@nri.co.jp" target="_blank">n-sakimura@nri.co.jp</a><br>
<mailto:<a href="mailto:n-sakimura@nri.co.jp" target="_blank">n-sakimura@nri.co.jp</a>><br>
<mailto:<a href="mailto:n-sakimura@nri.co.jp" target="_blank">n-sakimura@nri.co.jp</a><br>
<mailto:<a href="mailto:n-sakimura@nri.co.jp" target="_blank">n-sakimura@nri.co.jp</a>>>, Nomura Research Institute,<br>
Ltd.(Japan)<br>
* Robert Ott, <a href="mailto:robert.ott@clavid.com" target="_blank">robert.ott@clavid.com</a><br>
<mailto:<a href="mailto:robert.ott@clavid.com" target="_blank">robert.ott@clavid.com</a>><br>
<mailto:<a href="mailto:robert.ott@clavid.com" target="_blank">robert.ott@clavid.com</a><br>
<mailto:<a href="mailto:robert.ott@clavid.com" target="_blank">robert.ott@clavid.com</a>>>, Clavid (Switzerland)<br>
* Tatsuki Sakushima, <a href="mailto:tatsuki@nri.com" target="_blank">tatsuki@nri.com</a><br>
<mailto:<a href="mailto:tatsuki@nri.com" target="_blank">tatsuki@nri.com</a>> <mailto:<a href="mailto:tatsuki@nri.com" target="_blank">tatsuki@nri.com</a><br>
<mailto:<a href="mailto:tatsuki@nri.com" target="_blank">tatsuki@nri.com</a>>>,<br>
NRI America, Inc. (U.S.A.)<br>
* Toru Yamaguchi, <a href="mailto:trymch@gmail.com" target="_blank">trymch@gmail.com</a><br>
<mailto:<a href="mailto:trymch@gmail.com" target="_blank">trymch@gmail.com</a>> <mailto:<a href="mailto:trymch@gmail.com" target="_blank">trymch@gmail.com</a><br>
<mailto:<a href="mailto:trymch@gmail.com" target="_blank">trymch@gmail.com</a>>>,<br>
Cybozu Labs (Japan)<br>
<br>
In short, my first reaction to reading your email was<br>
to think,<br>
"Wow, here it is, the first example of OpenID turning<br>
into W3C and<br>
IETF and every other standards organization that<br>
turns into a small<br>
group of insiders trying to control innovation!"<br>
<br>
Of course I think you, more than almost anyone,<br>
can appreciate the<br>
irony of that thought – I believe it was to avoid<br>
that very<br>
situation that the OIDF was created, no?<br>
<br>
So if we DON'T want that to happen, I think what<br>
we need to do ASAP<br>
is turn this into a constructive dialog between the<br>
proposers of<br>
this Working Group and the Specs Council about how<br>
the charter might<br>
be amended to addess some of your concerns. (I'm not<br>
commenting yet<br>
on your specific concerns, other than to say that I<br>
agree with some<br>
and not with others.)<br>
<br>
I suspect email is going to be much too slow for<br>
such a dialog, so I<br>
would suggest that Nat and Tatksuki set up a telecon<br>
between the<br>
Working Group proposers and the Specs Council<br>
members. I would also<br>
suggest that before such a telecon, the Specs Council<br>
get together<br>
and collectively list their issues with the Charter<br>
on the Working<br>
Group Charter page. I have added a section for this<br>
purpose:<br>
<br>
<a href="http://wiki.openid.net/Working_Groups%3AContract_Exchange_1#cSpecificationCouncilIssues" target="_blank">http://wiki.openid.net/Working_Groups%3AContract_Exchange_1#cSpecificationCouncilIssues</a> <br>
<br>
<br>
It may be that all the Specs Council members<br>
agree with your four<br>
points below, in which case you can just wholesale<br>
copy them into<br>
the wiki page. However it is very important that the<br>
Specs Council<br>
come to it's own consensus about the issues it has<br>
with the charter,<br>
because without that, the WG proposers have no hope<br>
of addressing<br>
these issues, either with counterarguments or with<br>
potential amendments.<br>
<br>
Listing the issues there also enables us to have<br>
a more focused<br>
discussion than email alone by using comments<br>
directly on the wiki page.<br>
<br>
=Drummond<br>
<br>
------------------------------------------------------------------------<br>
<br>
*From:* David Recordon [mailto:<a href="mailto:recordond@gmail.com" target="_blank">recordond@gmail.com</a><br>
<mailto:<a href="mailto:recordond@gmail.com" target="_blank">recordond@gmail.com</a>><br>
<mailto:<a href="mailto:recordond@gmail.com" target="_blank">recordond@gmail.com</a><br>
<mailto:<a href="mailto:recordond@gmail.com" target="_blank">recordond@gmail.com</a>>>]<br>
*Sent:* Wednesday, December 31, 2008 12:33 AM<br>
*To:* Nat Sakimura<br>
*Cc:* <a href="mailto:specs-council@openid.net" target="_blank">specs-council@openid.net</a><br>
<mailto:<a href="mailto:specs-council@openid.net" target="_blank">specs-council@openid.net</a>><br>
<mailto:<a href="mailto:specs-council@openid.net" target="_blank">specs-council@openid.net</a><br>
<mailto:<a href="mailto:specs-council@openid.net" target="_blank">specs-council@openid.net</a>>>;<br>
Josh Hoyt; Tatsuki Sakushima; John Bradley;<br>
<a href="mailto:hdknr@ic-tact.co.jp" target="_blank">hdknr@ic-tact.co.jp</a> <mailto:<a href="mailto:hdknr@ic-tact.co.jp" target="_blank">hdknr@ic-tact.co.jp</a>><br>
<mailto:<a href="mailto:hdknr@ic-tact.co.jp" target="_blank">hdknr@ic-tact.co.jp</a><br>
<mailto:<a href="mailto:hdknr@ic-tact.co.jp" target="_blank">hdknr@ic-tact.co.jp</a>>>; Robert Ott; Michael<br>
Graves; Henrik<br>
Biering; Drummond Reed; Nat Sakimura; 山口徹<br>
<br>
<br>
*Subject:* Re: [OIDFSC] FW: Proposal to create the TX<br>
working group<br>
<br>
Hi Nat,<br>
<br>
I read Josh's email as agreeing with Mike's statement of:<br>
<br>
The OpenID Specifications Council recommends that<br>
members reject<br>
this proposal to create a working group because the<br>
charter is<br>
excessively broad, it seems to propose the creation<br>
of new<br>
mechanisms that unnecessarily create new ways to do<br>
accomplish<br>
existing tasks, such as digital signatures, and it<br>
the proposal is<br>
not sufficiently clear on whether it builds upon<br>
existing mechanisms<br>
such as AX 1.0 in a compatible manner, or whether it<br>
requires<br>
breaking changes to these underlying protocols.<br>
<br>
<br>
While you have clarified that you don't intend to<br>
create a new XML<br>
signature mechanism, OAuth describes a mechanism to<br>
use public keys<br>
to sign these sorts of parameters. Signatures aside,<br>
as Mike said<br>
other aspects of the charter seem quite broad and it<br>
is unclear how<br>
it will build upon AX 1.0 and other underlying<br>
existing OpenID<br>
technologies.<br>
<br>
Given the draft charter at<br>
<a href="http://wiki.openid.net/Working_Groups%3AContract_Exchange_1" target="_blank">http://wiki.openid.net/Working_Groups%3AContract_Exchange_1</a>:<br>
1) The purpose of producing a series of extensions<br>
seems too broad. OpenID was born on the idea of<br>
doing one simple thing and we've seen<br>
success with OpenID and related technologies when<br>
they are made up<br>
of small pieces loosely joined. OpenID<br>
Authentication 2.0 broke<br>
this rule in some areas and we're now seeing the<br>
repercussions of<br>
doing so.<br>
<br>
2) In what jurisdictions are these contracts legally<br>
binding? Is<br>
"arbitrary parties to create and exchange a<br>
mutually-digitally-signed legally binding 'contract'"<br>
a justifiable<br>
statement or should it be toned down? It should also<br>
be kept in<br>
mind that since OpenID's creation it has been very<br>
clear that OpenID<br>
does not provide trust, but rather trust can be built<br>
on top of<br>
identity. I'm not saying that OpenID should never<br>
deal with trust,<br>
just trying to understand if this Working Group<br>
intends to change<br>
how OpenID currently does not create this form of trust.<br>
<br>
3) The purpose says that the Working Group intends to<br>
possibly<br>
extend AX and create a series of specifications. It<br>
does not seem<br>
prudent to give a Working Group the ability to<br>
arbitrarily extend an<br>
existing extension or create an unlimited number of<br>
specifications.<br>
<br>
4) The Scope section is still not clear as to what<br>
the Working Group<br>
will actually be producing. I would prefer to see<br>
the section<br>
rewritten, maybe mimicking the structure currently<br>
being considered<br>
for the specification.<br>
<br>
As to if you wish to force this proposal forward, I<br>
do not believe<br>
that it currently has sufficient support within the<br>
OpenID community<br>
to succeed and that its broad scope contravenes the<br>
community's<br>
purpose. This is why I'm really hoping that the<br>
proposal can be<br>
refined to something which will be successful that a<br>
broad community<br>
can get behind!<br>
<br>
--David<br>
<br>
On Tue, Dec 30, 2008 at 9:03 PM, Nat Sakimura<br>
<<a href="mailto:sakimura@gmail.com" target="_blank">sakimura@gmail.com</a> <mailto:<a href="mailto:sakimura@gmail.com" target="_blank">sakimura@gmail.com</a>><br>
<mailto:<a href="mailto:sakimura@gmail.com" target="_blank">sakimura@gmail.com</a><br>
<mailto:<a href="mailto:sakimura@gmail.com" target="_blank">sakimura@gmail.com</a>>>> wrote:<br>
<br>
Hi Josh,<br>
To which statement did you agree?<br>
<br>
There has been a several things that has been<br>
pointed out, but I<br>
think I have answered to them.<br>
For example, for XML Sig, I have stated that this<br>
spec is not for<br>
XML, etc.<br>
For modularization, yes, that is a possibility but a<br>
scope needs to<br>
be able to cover a field that it requires, even if it<br>
ends up not<br>
covering that field.<br>
It is impossible to widen the scope though narrowing<br>
it down at a<br>
later date is easy.<br>
Unfortunately, I have not heard back any concrete<br>
response<br>
for amendments. It would be more constructive to have<br>
those.<br>
Also, if you are giving advise to the membership<br>
an recommendation<br>
for not approving it, you need to state the reasons<br>
concretely.<br>
It needs to be one of<br>
(a) an incomplete Proposal (i.e., failure to<br>
comply with §4.1);<br>
(b) a determination that the proposal contravenes<br>
the OpenID<br>
community's purpose;<br>
(c) a determination that the proposed WG does not<br>
have sufficient<br>
support to succeed<br>
<br>
or to deliver proposed deliverables within<br>
projected<br>
completion dates; or<br>
(d) a determination that the proposal is likely<br>
to cause legal<br>
liability for the OIDF or others.<br>
and should state why the proposal falls into one<br>
of the criteria<br>
concretely and accountably.<br>
Regards,<br>
=nat<br>
<br>
On Wed, Dec 31, 2008 at 7:58 AM, Josh Hoyt<br>
<<a href="mailto:josh@janrain.com" target="_blank">josh@janrain.com</a> <mailto:<a href="mailto:josh@janrain.com" target="_blank">josh@janrain.com</a>><br>
<mailto:<a href="mailto:josh@janrain.com" target="_blank">josh@janrain.com</a> <mailto:<a href="mailto:josh@janrain.com" target="_blank">josh@janrain.com</a>>>><br>
wrote:<br>
<br>
On Tue, Dec 30, 2008 at 12:17 PM, Mike Jones<br>
<br>
<<a href="mailto:Michael.Jones@microsoft.com" target="_blank">Michael.Jones@microsoft.com</a><br>
<mailto:<a href="mailto:Michael.Jones@microsoft.com" target="_blank">Michael.Jones@microsoft.com</a>><br>
<mailto:<a href="mailto:Michael.Jones@microsoft.com" target="_blank">Michael.Jones@microsoft.com</a><br>
<mailto:<a href="mailto:Michael.Jones@microsoft.com" target="_blank">Michael.Jones@microsoft.com</a>>>><br>
wrote:<br>
<br>
> I realize it was Christmas week but it's been a<br>
week and we've<br>
heard nothing<br>
> from any of the other specs council members on<br>
this proposal (or<br>
the other<br>
> one as well).<br>
<br>
I agree with the statement that you made about this<br>
proposal.<br>
<br>
Josh<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
-- Nat Sakimura (=nat)<br>
<a href="http://www.sakimura.org/en/" target="_blank">http://www.sakimura.org/en/</a><br>
<br>
-- Nat Sakimura (=nat)<br>
<a href="http://www.sakimura.org/en/" target="_blank">http://www.sakimura.org/en/</a><br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
</blockquote>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br>