Hi Brian I'm a big fan of Pragmatic Marketing and their Product Management model and I can add am MRD to the v.Next SOW. The charters should encapsulate most of a PRD. An overall v.Next PRD would be useful as the WGs spin up and a holistic product vision emerges. I don't think we have enough data for a v.Next PRD at this point, but we can create a draft MRD.
Given David and Jospeh's desire to get something out quickly, I don't think they will be wanting to wait for an MRD -- I would guess they think they know what they need for their use cases (and I believe they do have a good understanding of their use cases) -- and I don't get a sense they want to focus on their immediate use cases rather than take a holistic approach. I'm hoping that if we sit down and chat over some beers, we can brain storm and figure out how to move forward. I don't think an MRD or PRD will be the path, but we can discuss that. -- Dick On 2010-05-23, at 11:18 AM, Brian Kissel wrote: > +1, thanks Dick for driving this forward. > > I'm sure that there are lots of things that need to be resolved, but here are > some that seem to be critical at this point, welcome input from others. > > 1. Is it reasonable to try to integrate OpenID Connect charter into the > V.Next WG charter or do we need separate charters? > 2. Is it reasonable to not fork the technology and still achieve the > charters that David & Joseph are advocating relative the charter that Nat & > John Bradley are advocating? > 3. If the answer to #2 is no, should we be willing to have a > comprehensive OpenID V.Next charter that allows for forking the technology, > but manage it all within the OIDF? > 4. If we are willing to allow forking of the technology, how do we > minimize the adverse impact on RPs and end users who may start out with one > application or use case, but then want to expand into others without breaking > existing deployments? > > Also, I know that we use the words "charter, requirements, specifications" in > foundation speak, but for clarity of understanding, I’d suggest we think in > terms of a “product” which is what the market wants from us. In our case, > the product isn’t code per se, but standards and specifications that deliver > functionality and benefits to the RP and end user in a clear, consistent, > reliable, and interoperable way. The best guidance I’ve seen on moving from > concept to product is from Pragmatic Marketing: > http://www.pragmaticmarketing.com > > As I think about what we’re trying to accomplish, it seems like what we need > (regardless of what we call it) are the following: > > · Market Requirement Document (MRD) – what needs in the market are we > trying to address (easier registration and login, portable reuse of personal > profiles and other metadata, social publishing across sites, enhanced > security, etc.). As Eric and Raj observed at the last board meeting, it > doesn’t seem like we can paint this with a broad brush. Perhaps there are > some baseline requirements across all markets and applications, but there may > be unique requirements by segment (social web, ecommerce, media & > entertainment companies, government, etc.). Seems like we should first > agree on the key markets/applications and corresponding personas and use > cases we’re trying to address with V.Next + OpenID Connect. > · Product Requirement Document (PRD) – this is designed to allow > people within an organization to understand what a product should do and how > it should work. Key components are: > o Purpose and scope, from both a technical and business perspective > o Stakeholder identification > o Market assessment and target demographics > o Product overview and use cases > o Requirements, including > § functional requirements (e.g. what a product should do) > § usability requirements > § technical requirements (e.g. security, network, platform, integration, > client) > § environmental requirements > § support requirements > § interaction requirements (e.g. how the software should work with other > systems) > o Constraints > o Workflow plans, timelines and milestones > o Evaluation plan and performance metrics > · Functional Specification (FS) – Seems like only after we have > agreement on the MRD and PRD can we deliver the FS and any corresponding open > source libraries, test suites, deployment guides, etc. > > Maybe this seems like a lot of work, and it is non-trivial, but unless we > agree on what we’re trying to deliver, for who, and with what benefits, it > will be hard for us to succeed. You wouldn’t typically try to build a house > without architectural designs and construction drawings, and if you did, you > might not get what you thought wanted at the outset. > > I’m not advocating that this has to be overly detailed and protracted, but if > we can quickly come to consensus on some of these things, it seems like it > will accelerate our long term progress and reduce a lot of friction along the > way. It will also be invaluable in communicating to RPs and end users what > to expect – not only from V.Next, but w.r.t. the other initiatives like > Artifact Binding, Discovery, Contract Exchange, OAuth 2.0, Portable Contacts, > Activity Streams, etc. and how all these will work together to address market > needs. I’d love to see us publish an MRD and PRD for V.Next (using whatever > nomenclature we think is appropriate) on the OpenID Foundation website to > share with the world on what’s coming. > > Welcoming input from others. > > Cheers, > > Brian > ___________ > > Brian Kissel > CEO - JanRain, Inc. > [email protected] > Mobile: 503.342.2668 | Fax: 503.296.5502 > 519 SW 3rd Ave. Suite 600 Portland, OR 97204 > > Increase registrations, engage users, and grow your brand with RPX. Learn > more at www.rpxnow.com > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Dick Hardt > Sent: Sunday, May 23, 2010 10:05 AM > To: David Recordon; Joseph Smarr; Allen Tom > Cc: [email protected] > Subject: [OpenID board] in-person chat about Connect and v.Next > Importance: High > > David, Joseph, Allen > > As fellow board members, fellow tech comm members and local residents, I > believe it would be useful for the four of us to get together and hash out > these topics. > > Would you guys be interested in getting together? > > If so, Monday afternoon or evening works for me. Alternatively, how about > Friday afternoon? (I am in Denver for Glucon Tue-Thu) > > I could also meet this afternoon or evening (Sunday) -- but that is likely > too short of notice. > > Somewhere in SF that is not too loud that serves beer and yummy snacks. My > treat! > > I think it is everyone's interest that we start rowing together in the OpenID > boat: the community is looking to us for leadership. > > (If others feel that could contribute and are able to meet in person, you are > more than welcome to join!) > > -- Dick > > _______________________________________________ > board mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-board > _______________________________________________ > board mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-board
_______________________________________________ board mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-board
