This was discussed briefly by the Board yesterday during our meeting
and we plan to take a look at the IPR Process in a holistic
perspective, looking at the changes that can be made to address how
hard it is to get started.
--David
On Mar 19, 2009, at 1:10 PM, Martin Atkins wrote:
David Recordon wrote:
Hey Brett,
There is a 14-day discussion period once the Specs Council has
approved the WG which occurs on the [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]
> mailing list. There was also a discussion on the same list
leading up to the Specs Council vote on the proposal.
I think everyone agrees that there are other user interface
improvements to be made, though pop-ups are a good starting point.
I think we should address this once the working group is created
and see if there is consensus there to rename the specification
being produced.
Once again I find myself wondering why there is a vote to create a
working group. This is especially perplexing in this case where you
seem to be suggesting that after the group is formed it might decide
to change its scope.
Why can't we just let working groups be created and do their work
and then do the vote on the finished specification itself rather
than on the plan to create one?
All the current setup seems to achieve is that folks do most of the
work in other forums like the "step2" mailing list where the OpenID
community can't necessarily see it, and then they just go through
the motions to create the working group after most of the work has
already been done. This seems counter-productive.
_______________________________________________
board mailing list
[email protected]
http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/board
_______________________________________________
board mailing list
[email protected]
http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/board
