<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; border-collapse: collapse; "><div>Yeah, I no longer need to be involved.</div>
<div><br></div><div>Or, in council speak:</div><div><br></div><div>+1</div><div><br></div><div>(or is that -1?)</div><div><br></div><div>In any case, there are surely better replacements for me. :-)</div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: separate; font-size: small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: collapse;"><br>
</span></span></div></span><div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 9:26 AM, Mike Jones <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:Michael.Jones@microsoft.com">Michael.Jones@microsoft.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
<div lang="EN-US" link="blue" vlink="purple">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1F497D">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.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1F497D"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1F497D">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.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1F497D"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1F497D">Are
there any objections to now inviting them to join?</span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;color:#1F497D"></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;color:#1F497D"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;color:#1F497D"> --
Mike</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;color:#1F497D"> </span></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:10.0pt">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:10.0pt">
<a href="mailto:openid-specs-council-bounces@lists.openid.net" target="_blank">openid-specs-council-bounces@lists.openid.net</a>
[mailto:<a href="mailto:openid-specs-council-bounces@lists.openid.net" target="_blank">openid-specs-council-bounces@lists.openid.net</a>] <b>On Behalf Of </b>Allen
Tom<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Sunday, May 23, 2010 6:05 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> David Recordon; Mike Jones<br>
<b>Cc:</b> Johnny Bufu; Brad Fitzpatrick;
<a href="mailto:openid-specs-council@lists.openid.net" target="_blank">openid-specs-council@lists.openid.net</a>; Josh Hoyt; Dick Hardt<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [OIDFSC] Refreshing the OpenID specs council</span></p>
</div>
</div><div><div></div><div class="h5">
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">Yes, I’d like to remain active on the
specs council.<br>
<br>
In addition to Breno and Nat, I also think that Dirk Balfanz, Joseph Smarr, and
John Bradley would also be really good additions.<br>
<br>
Allen<br>
<br>
<br>
On 5/23/10 5:49 PM, "David Recordon" <<a href="http://recordond@gmail.com" target="_blank">recordond@gmail.com</a>>
wrote:</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">Yes,
I will remain active.<br>
<br>
On Sun, May 23, 2010 at 2:46 PM, Dick Hardt <<a href="http://dick.hardt@gmail.com" target="_blank">dick.hardt@gmail.com</a>>
wrote:</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">Yes, I will remain active on the specs
council.<br>
<br>
On 2010-05-23, at 1:04 PM, Mike Jones wrote:</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">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 <span style="color:blue">this note <<a href="http://lists.openid.net/pipermail/openid-board/2008-June/002989.html" target="_blank">http://lists.openid.net/pipermail/openid-board/2008-June/002989.html</a>>
</span>, the council currently consists of these people, who are subscribed to
the openid-specs-council list with these addresses:<br>
- Allen Tom atom at <span style="color:blue"><a href="http://yahoo-inc.com" target="_blank">yahoo-inc.com</a>
<<a href="http://yahoo-inc.com" target="_blank">http://yahoo-inc.com</a>> <br>
</span> - Brad Fitzpatrick brad at <span style="color:blue"><a href="http://danga.com" target="_blank">danga.com</a>
<<a href="http://danga.com" target="_blank">http://danga.com</a>> <br>
</span> - David Recordon recordond at <span style="color:blue"><a href="http://gmail.com" target="_blank">gmail.com</a>
<<a href="http://gmail.com" target="_blank">http://gmail.com</a>> <br>
</span> - Johnny Bufu johnny.bufu at <span style="color:blue"><a href="http://gmail.com" target="_blank">gmail.com</a>
<<a href="http://gmail.com" target="_blank">http://gmail.com</a>> <br>
</span> - Josh Hoyt josh at <span style="color:blue"><a href="http://janrain.com" target="_blank">janrain.com</a>
<<a href="http://janrain.com" target="_blank">http://janrain.com</a>> <br>
</span> - Dick Hardt dick.hardt at <span style="color:blue"><a href="http://gmail.com" target="_blank">gmail.com</a>
<<a href="http://gmail.com" target="_blank">http://gmail.com</a>> <br>
</span> - Mike Jones michael.jones at <span style="color:blue"><a href="http://microsoft.com" target="_blank">microsoft.com</a>
<<a href="http://microsoft.com" target="_blank">http://microsoft.com</a>> <br>
</span> <br>
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.<br>
<br>
To update your subscription to the openid-specs-council list, go to <span style="color:blue"><a href="http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-specs-council" target="_blank">http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-specs-council</a></span>.<br>
<br>
Thanks,<br>
-- Mike<br>
<br>
As a reminder of the role of the specifications council, here are some of the
relevant passages from the <span style="color:blue">OpenID Process
document <<a href="http://openid.net/wordpress-content/uploads/2010/01/OpenID_Process_Document_December_2009_Final_Approved.pdf" target="_blank">http://openid.net/wordpress-content/uploads/2010/01/OpenID_Process_Document_December_2009_Final_Approved.pdf</a>>
</span>:<br>
<br>
</span><b><span style="font-size:9.0pt">1.4</span></b><span style="font-size:9.0pt"> “<b>Editor(s)</b>”
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.<br>
</span><span><br>
</span><b><span style="font-size:9.0pt">1.5</span></b><span style="font-size:9.0pt"> “<b>Eligible
Editors</b>” 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 days’ email notice.<br>
</span><span><br>
</span><b><span style="font-size:9.0pt">1.6</span></b><span style="font-size:9.0pt"> “<b>Specifications
Council</b>” 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).<br>
</span><span><br>
</span><span style="font-size:11.0pt"> <br>
</span><b><span style="font-size:9.0pt">2
Specifications Council.</span></b><span style="font-size:9.0pt"> 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 “term
limits” 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.<br>
</span><span><br>
</span><span style="font-size:11.0pt"> <br>
</span><b><span style="font-size:9.0pt">4.2
Review.</span></b><span style="font-size:9.0pt">
The Specifications Council will review each proposal within 15 days after
receipt and promptly provide notice to <span style="color:blue"><a href="http://specs@openid.net" target="_blank">specs@openid.net</a></span> 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:<br>
</span><span><br>
</span><b><span style="font-size:9.0pt">(a) </span></b><span style="font-size:9.0pt">an incomplete
Proposal (i.e., failure to comply with §4.1);<br>
</span><span><br>
</span><b><span style="font-size:9.0pt">(b) </span></b><span style="font-size:9.0pt">a determination that
the proposal contravenes the OpenID community’s purpose;<br>
</span><span><br>
</span><b><span style="font-size:9.0pt">(c) </span></b><span style="font-size:9.0pt">a determination that
the proposed WG does not have sufficient support to succeed or to deliver
proposed deliverables within projected completion dates; or<br>
</span><span><br>
</span><b><span style="font-size:9.0pt">(d) </span></b><span style="font-size:9.0pt">a
determination that the proposal is likely to cause legal liability for the OIDF
or others.<br>
</span><span><br>
</span><span style="font-size:9.0pt">If no
recommendation was issued within 15 days after receipt, the Proposal is deemed
to be accepted.<br>
</span><span><br>
</span><span style="font-size:9.0pt">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.
</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"> </p>
</div></div></div>
</div>
</blockquote></div><br>