The community can always just have a lightweight version of voting. Someone makes a proposal, others +1 it, boom done.
On Mar 10, 2008, at 11:41 AM, Martin Atkins wrote: > Drummond Reed wrote: >> Scott and Bill: >> >> Per the thread below, the question of when we will be opening up >> new Working >> Groups for specifications is starting to come up. I'm not saying >> there is a >> compelling reason to do that yet for any spec other than PAPE (and >> the >> Trusted Exchange spec that Nat Sakimura and his team have >> suggested), but I >> do think that OIDF needs to take a public stance about: >> >> a) The status of current WGs (to my knowledge it's not published >> anywhere >> what WGs exist or are planned) >> >> b) The process for community members to form a WG. >> >> Can we put a short discussion about this on this week's agenda? >> > > It was my understanding that the blocker for this is that we have no > voting system through which we can hold a vote for the creation of a > WG. > > Obviously that is in hand per our discussions at the last meeting. > However, I guess we could discuss an interim plan to get the first few > WGs up and running quickly. It'd be nice if these could be up and > running by IIW so that the WGs can potentially present to the > community > what they've been up to. > > _______________________________________________ > board mailing list > [email protected] > http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/board _______________________________________________ board mailing list [email protected] http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/board
