Hey Guys, did you make a decision? We need to have the members of the
spec council so that we can review the PAPE proposal.
-- Dick
On 10-May-08, at 10:23 AM, Mike Jones wrote:
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 [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
