Ping...
________________________________
From: Mike Jones
Sent: Friday, May 09, 2008 8:49 AM
To: Josh Hoyt; Johnny Bufu; David Recordon
Cc: [email protected]; Dick Hardt
Subject: RE: Creating the OpenID specifications council
Importance: High
Hi guys,
The specifications council needs to work on its report *today* since it is due
by tomorrow. Please let us know who the other 5 members are ASAP so we can
start working on this.
Thanks,
-- Mike
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mike Jones
Sent: Tuesday, April 29, 2008 8:54 AM
To: Josh Hoyt; Johnny Bufu; David Recordon
Cc: '[email protected]'
Subject: Re: [OpenID board] Creating the OpenID specifications council
Dear Josh, Johnny, and David,
We need you to choose 5 specifications council members in addition to Dick and
myself. This is a reminder to talk among yourselves and report back to the
board soon. The council will have to make a recommendation on the proposal to
create the PAPE working group by May 10th at the latest, and hopefully before
that. Therefore, it's important that the council be formed soon.
Thank you,
-- Mike
From: Mike Jones
Sent: Thursday, April 24, 2008 5:42 PM
To: Josh Hoyt; Johnny Bufu; David Recordon
Cc: Dick Hardt; [email protected]
Subject: Creating the OpenID specifications council
Hi Josh, Johnny, and David,
The OpenID Foundation process for creating specifications calls for a
Specifications Council to review proposed working groups. At least one working
group is about to be proposed and so we need to create the specifications
council. The process document (at http://openid.net/ipr/) states about
creation of the specifications council:
1.8 "Specifications Council" 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 "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).
Today the board chose Dick Hardt and myself as the board's two representatives.
As the "then-current OpenID Authentication 2.0 Specification Editors" I'm
writing to ask you to select five additional persons who you believe would be
appropriate experts to review and provide feedback on proposed OpenID working
groups. Three of those persons may be yourselves if you so choose.
Can you please discuss this matter among yourselves and then report back to the
board soon on your choices for the specifications council members?
This is occurring now because I am about to propose the creation of a working
group to complete the PAPE specification. Once the proposal is submitted, the
specifications council's job is:
4.2 Review. The Specifications Council will review each proposal within 15
days after receipt and promptly provide notice to [EMAIL
PROTECTED]<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 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).
The decision to accept or reject the proposal will then promptly be submitted
to a vote of the OIDF membership, in accordance with the voting procedures in
§3. 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 community's
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.
Thanks a lot!
-- Mike
_______________________________________________
board mailing list
[email protected]
http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/board
