As several OpenID working groups are being proposed, it would be good to ensure that the OpenID specifications council is populated with people who are currently active in specification development and have the appropriate expertise. Per this note<http://lists.openid.net/pipermail/openid-board/2008-June/002989.html>, the council currently consists of these people, who are subscribed to the openid-specs-council list with these addresses:
- Allen Tom atom at yahoo-inc.com
- Brad Fitzpatrick brad at danga.com
- David Recordon recordond at gmail.com
- Johnny Bufu johnny.bufu at gmail.com
- Josh Hoyt josh at janrain.com
- Dick Hardt dick.hardt at gmail.com
- Mike Jones michael.jones at microsoft.com

Can each of you who plan to remain active on the specifications council PLEASE RESPOND affirmatively to this note in the next few days? Otherwise, we should offer the positions to other spec editors who will be active. Nat Sakimura is certainly one person who comes to mind, as editor of the CX and Artifact Binding specifications, and also Breno de Medeiros, who is an editor for the User Interface Extension.

To update your subscription to the openid-specs-council list, go to http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-specs-council.

Thanks,
-- Mike

As a reminder of the role of the specifications council, here are some of the relevant passages from the OpenID Process document<http://openid.net/wordpress-content/uploads/2010/01/OpenID_Process_Document_December_2009_Final_Approved.pdf>:


1.4 "Editor(s)" means, for a particular Specification to be developed by a particular WG, the individual Contributor(s) selected to coordinate development of, and transcription of the work of the WG for, such Specification, as well as (together with any other Editors for that WG) to administer WG operation.

1.5 "Eligible Editors" means, as determined on a given date, all Editors from current WGs and all other persons who: (a) were WG Editors at any time in the two years before such date; (b) are alive and have provided and maintained updated contact information with the OpenID Foundation; and (c) elect to participate in selection of the Specifications Council after at least seven days' email notice.

1.6 "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). In the event that a Specifications Council member failed to participate in the discussion of two consecutive working group proposals, the member will be deemed to have resigned, and new specifications council members who are committed to participating in the process will be appointed to replace the member.


4.2 Review. The Specifications Council will review each proposal within 15 days after receipt and promptly provide notice to specs at openid.net<mailto:specs at openid.net> 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). 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.

If no recommendation was issued within 15 days after receipt, the Proposal is deemed to be accepted.

When the Specifications Council rejects the proposal, the Proposers may submit the Proposal to a vote of the OIDF membership, in accordance with the voting procedures in ?3. When the vote passes, the proposal is deemed to be accepted.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openid.net/pipermail/openid-specs-council/attachments/20100523/533bc38f/attachment.html>

Search Discussions

  • Dick Hardt at May 23, 2010 at 8:46 pm
    Yes, I will remain active on the specs council.
    On 2010-05-23, at 1:04 PM, Mike Jones wrote:

    As several OpenID working groups are being proposed, it would be good to ensure that the OpenID specifications council is populated with people who are currently active in specification development and have the appropriate expertise. Per this note, the council currently consists of these people, who are subscribed to the openid-specs-council list with these addresses:
    - Allen Tom atom at yahoo-inc.com
    - Brad Fitzpatrick brad at danga.com
    - David Recordon recordond at gmail.com
    - Johnny Bufu johnny.bufu at gmail.com
    - Josh Hoyt josh at janrain.com
    - Dick Hardt dick.hardt at gmail.com
    - Mike Jones michael.jones at microsoft.com

    Can each of you who plan to remain active on the specifications council PLEASE RESPOND affirmatively to this note in the next few days? Otherwise, we should offer the positions to other spec editors who will be active. Nat Sakimura is certainly one person who comes to mind, as editor of the CX and Artifact Binding specifications, and also Breno de Medeiros, who is an editor for the User Interface Extension.

    To update your subscription to the openid-specs-council list, go to http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-specs-council.

    Thanks,
    -- Mike

    As a reminder of the role of the specifications council, here are some of the relevant passages from the OpenID Process document:

    1.4 ?Editor(s)? means, for a particular Specification to be developed by a particular WG, the individual Contributor(s) selected to coordinate development of, and transcription of the work of the WG for, such Specification, as well as (together with any other Editors for that WG) to administer WG operation.

    1.5 ?Eligible Editors? means, as determined on a given date, all Editors from current WGs and all other persons who: (a) were WG Editors at any time in the two years before such date; (b) are alive and have provided and maintained updated contact information with the OpenID Foundation; and (c) elect to participate in selection of the Specifications Council after at least seven days? email notice.

    1.6 ?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). In the event that a Specifications Council member failed to participate in the discussion of two consecutive working group proposals, the member will be deemed to have resigned, and new specifications council members who are committed to participating in the process will be appointed to replace the member.


    4.2 Review. The Specifications Council will review each proposal within 15 days after receipt and promptly provide notice to specs at openid.net 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). 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.

    If no recommendation was issued within 15 days after receipt, the Proposal is deemed to be accepted.

    When the Specifications Council rejects the proposal, the Proposers may submit the Proposal to a vote of the OIDF membership, in accordance with the voting procedures in ?3. When the vote passes, the proposal is deemed to be accepted.
    -------------- next part --------------
    An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
    URL: <http://lists.openid.net/pipermail/openid-specs-council/attachments/20100523/56638356/attachment-0001.html>
  • David Recordon at May 24, 2010 at 12:49 am
    Yes, I will remain active.
    On Sun, May 23, 2010 at 2:46 PM, Dick Hardt wrote:

    Yes, I will remain active on the specs council.

    On 2010-05-23, at 1:04 PM, Mike Jones wrote:

    As several OpenID working groups are being proposed, it would be good to
    ensure that the OpenID specifications council is populated with people who
    are currently active in specification development and have the appropriate
    expertise. Per this note<http://lists.openid.net/pipermail/openid-board/2008-June/002989.html>,
    the council currently consists of these people, who are subscribed to the
    openid-specs-council list with these addresses:
    - Allen Tom atom at yahoo-inc.com
    - Brad Fitzpatrick brad at danga.com
    - David Recordon recordond at gmail.com
    - Johnny Bufu johnny.bufu at gmail.com
    - Josh Hoyt josh at janrain.com
    - Dick Hardt dick.hardt at gmail.com
    - Mike Jones michael.jones at microsoft.com

    Can each of you who plan to remain active on the specifications council
    PLEASE RESPOND affirmatively to this note in the next few days? Otherwise,
    we should offer the positions to other spec editors who will be active. Nat
    Sakimura is certainly one person who comes to mind, as editor of the CX and
    Artifact Binding specifications, and also Breno de Medeiros, who is an
    editor for the User Interface Extension.

    To update your subscription to the openid-specs-council list, go to
    http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-specs-council.

    Thanks,
    -- Mike

    As a reminder of the role of the specifications council, here are some of
    the relevant passages from the OpenID Process document<http://openid.net/wordpress-content/uploads/2010/01/OpenID_Process_Document_December_2009_Final_Approved.pdf>
    :


    *1.4* ?*Editor(s)*? means, for a particular Specification to be developed
    by a particular WG, the individual Contributor(s) selected to coordinate
    development of, and transcription of the work of the WG for, such
    Specification, as well as (together with any other Editors for that WG) to
    administer WG operation.

    *1.5* ?*Eligible Editors*? means, as determined on a given date, all
    Editors from current WGs and all other persons who: (a) were WG Editors at
    any time in the two years before such date; (b) are alive and have provided
    and maintained updated contact information with the OpenID Foundation; and
    (c) elect to participate in selection of the Specifications Council after at
    least seven days? email notice.

    *1.6* ?*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). In the event that a
    Specifications Council member failed to participate in the discussion of two
    consecutive working group proposals, the member will be deemed to have
    resigned, and new specifications council members who are committed to
    participating in the process will be appointed to replace the member.**


    *4.2 Review.* The Specifications Council will review each proposal
    within 15 days after receipt and promptly provide notice to
    specs at openid.net 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). 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.

    If no recommendation was issued within 15 days after receipt, the Proposal
    is deemed to be accepted.

    When the Specifications Council rejects the proposal, the Proposers may
    submit the Proposal to a vote of the OIDF membership, in accordance with the
    voting procedures in ?3. When the vote passes, the proposal is deemed to be
    accepted.

    -------------- next part --------------
    An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
    URL: <http://lists.openid.net/pipermail/openid-specs-council/attachments/20100523/94c9c92c/attachment.html>
  • Allen Tom at May 24, 2010 at 1:05 am
    Yes, I?d like to remain active on the specs council.

    In addition to Breno and Nat, I also think that Dirk Balfanz, Joseph Smarr,
    and John Bradley would also be really good additions.

    Allen

    On 5/23/10 5:49 PM, "David Recordon" wrote:

    Yes, I will remain active.
    On Sun, May 23, 2010 at 2:46 PM, Dick Hardt wrote:
    Yes, I will remain active on the specs council.
    On 2010-05-23, at 1:04 PM, Mike Jones wrote:

    As several OpenID working groups are being proposed, it would be good to
    ensure that the OpenID specifications council is populated with people who
    are currently active in specification development and have the appropriate
    expertise.? Per?this note
    <http://lists.openid.net/pipermail/openid-board/2008-June/002989.html> , the
    council currently consists of these people, who are subscribed to the
    openid-specs-council list with these addresses:
    ? - Allen Tom? atom at?yahoo-inc.com <http://yahoo-inc.com>
    ? - Brad Fitzpatrick? brad at?danga.com <http://danga.com>
    ? - David Recordon? recordond at?gmail.com <http://gmail.com>
    ? - Johnny Bufu? johnny.bufu at?gmail.com <http://gmail.com>
    ? - Josh Hoyt? josh at?janrain.com <http://janrain.com>
    ? - Dick Hardt ?dick.hardt at?gmail.com <http://gmail.com>
    ? - Mike Jones? michael.jones at?microsoft.com <http://microsoft.com>
    ?
    Can each of you who plan to remain active on the specifications council
    PLEASE RESPOND affirmatively to this note in the next few days?? Otherwise,
    we should offer the positions to other spec editors who will be active.? Nat
    Sakimura is certainly one person who comes to mind, as editor of the CX and
    Artifact Binding specifications, and also Breno de Medeiros, who is an
    editor for the User Interface Extension.
    ?
    To update your subscription to the openid-specs-council list, go
    to?http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-specs-council.
    ?
    ??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Thanks,
    ??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? -- Mike
    ?
    As a reminder of the role of the specifications council, here are some of
    the relevant passages from the?OpenID Process document
    <http://openid.net/wordpress-content/uploads/2010/01/OpenID_Process_Document
    _December_2009_Final_Approved.pdf> :
    ?
    1.4? ?Editor(s)? means, for a particular Specification to be developed by a
    particular WG, the individual Contributor(s) selected to coordinate
    development of, and transcription of the work of the WG for, such
    Specification, as well as (together with any other Editors for that WG) to
    administer WG operation.

    1.5? ?Eligible Editors? means, as determined on a given date, all Editors
    from current WGs and all other persons who: (a)?were WG Editors at any time
    in the two years before such date; (b)?are alive and have provided and
    maintained updated contact information with the OpenID Foundation; and
    (c)?elect to participate in selection of the Specifications Council after at
    least seven days? email notice.

    1.6? ?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). In the event that a
    Specifications Council member failed to participate in the discussion of two
    consecutive working group proposals, the member will be deemed to have
    resigned, and new specifications council members who are committed to
    participating in the process will be appointed to replace the member.

    ?
    4.2? Review.? The Specifications Council will review each proposal within 15
    days after receipt and promptly provide notice to?specs at openid.net?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). 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.

    If no recommendation was issued within 15 days after receipt, the Proposal
    is deemed to be accepted.

    When the Specifications Council rejects the proposal, the Proposers may
    submit the Proposal to a vote of the OIDF membership, in accordance with the
    voting procedures in ?3. When the vote passes, the proposal is deemed to be
    accepted. ?
    -------------- next part --------------
    An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
    URL: <http://lists.openid.net/pipermail/openid-specs-council/attachments/20100523/4cea9ede/attachment-0001.html>
  • Mike Jones at May 25, 2010 at 4:26 pm
    At this point, we have affirmative responses from all but Brad and Josh. I propose that we now invite Breno and Nat to join the council to replace Brad and Josh.

    I agree that Dirk, Joseph, and John all bring strong qualifications, but to my knowledge, none have served as OpenID specification editors, whereas Breno and Nat have.

    Are there any objections to now inviting them to join?

    -- Mike

    From: openid-specs-council-bounces at lists.openid.net [mailto:openid-specs-council-bounces at lists.openid.net] On Behalf Of Allen Tom
    Sent: Sunday, May 23, 2010 6:05 PM
    To: David Recordon; Mike Jones
    Cc: Johnny Bufu; Brad Fitzpatrick; openid-specs-council at lists.openid.net; Josh Hoyt; Dick Hardt
    Subject: Re: [OIDFSC] Refreshing the OpenID specs council

    Yes, I'd like to remain active on the specs council.

    In addition to Breno and Nat, I also think that Dirk Balfanz, Joseph Smarr, and John Bradley would also be really good additions.

    Allen


    On 5/23/10 5:49 PM, "David Recordon" wrote:
    Yes, I will remain active.

    On Sun, May 23, 2010 at 2:46 PM, Dick Hardt wrote:
    Yes, I will remain active on the specs council.

    On 2010-05-23, at 1:04 PM, Mike Jones wrote:
    As several OpenID working groups are being proposed, it would be good to ensure that the OpenID specifications council is populated with people who are currently active in specification development and have the appropriate expertise. Per this note <http://lists.openid.net/pipermail/openid-board/2008-June/002989.html> , the council currently consists of these people, who are subscribed to the openid-specs-council list with these addresses:
    - Allen Tom atom at yahoo-inc.com <http://yahoo-inc.com>
    - Brad Fitzpatrick brad at danga.com <http://danga.com>
    - David Recordon recordond at gmail.com <http://gmail.com>
    - Johnny Bufu johnny.bufu at gmail.com <http://gmail.com>
    - Josh Hoyt josh at janrain.com <http://janrain.com>
    - Dick Hardt dick.hardt at gmail.com <http://gmail.com>
    - Mike Jones michael.jones at microsoft.com <http://microsoft.com>

    Can each of you who plan to remain active on the specifications council PLEASE RESPOND affirmatively to this note in the next few days? Otherwise, we should offer the positions to other spec editors who will be active. Nat Sakimura is certainly one person who comes to mind, as editor of the CX and Artifact Binding specifications, and also Breno de Medeiros, who is an editor for the User Interface Extension.

    To update your subscription to the openid-specs-council list, go to http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-specs-council.

    Thanks,
    -- Mike

    As a reminder of the role of the specifications council, here are some of the relevant passages from the OpenID Process document <http://openid.net/wordpress-content/uploads/2010/01/OpenID_Process_Document_December_2009_Final_Approved.pdf> :

    1.4 "Editor(s)" means, for a particular Specification to be developed by a particular WG, the individual Contributor(s) selected to coordinate development of, and transcription of the work of the WG for, such Specification, as well as (together with any other Editors for that WG) to administer WG operation.

    1.5 "Eligible Editors" means, as determined on a given date, all Editors from current WGs and all other persons who: (a) were WG Editors at any time in the two years before such date; (b) are alive and have provided and maintained updated contact information with the OpenID Foundation; and (c) elect to participate in selection of the Specifications Council after at least seven days' email notice.

    1.6 "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). In the event that a Specifications Council member failed to participate in the discussion of two consecutive working group proposals, the member will be deemed to have resigned, and new specifications council members who are committed to participating in the process will be appointed to replace the member.


    4.2 Review. The Specifications Council will review each proposal within 15 days after receipt and promptly provide notice to specs at openid.net 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). 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.

    If no recommendation was issued within 15 days after receipt, the Proposal is deemed to be accepted.

    When the Specifications Council rejects the proposal, the Proposers may submit the Proposal to a vote of the OIDF membership, in accordance with the voting procedures in ?3. When the vote passes, the proposal is deemed to be accepted.


    -------------- next part --------------
    An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
    URL: <http://lists.openid.net/pipermail/openid-specs-council/attachments/20100525/215406de/attachment.html>
  • David Recordon at May 25, 2010 at 4:42 pm
    Given that the UX Extension was never finalized, I think everyone is on a
    level playing field.

    The Specs Council is made up of two people appointed by the Board and five
    by the "Eligible Editors". The Editors are supposed to select among
    themselves, but can appoint other appropriate people as well.

    I'd recommend adding Nat and Joseph given that the Hybrid extension has had
    more deployment than UX and his experience editing other specifications such
    as Portable Contacts.

    --David

    On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 10:26 AM, Mike Jones wrote:

    At this point, we have affirmative responses from all but Brad and Josh.
    I propose that we now invite Breno and Nat to join the council to replace
    Brad and Josh.



    I agree that Dirk, Joseph, and John all bring strong qualifications, but to
    my knowledge, none have served as OpenID specification editors, whereas
    Breno and Nat have.



    Are there any objections to now inviting them to join?



    -- Mike



    *From:* openid-specs-council-bounces at lists.openid.net [mailto:
    openid-specs-council-bounces at lists.openid.net] *On Behalf Of *Allen Tom
    *Sent:* Sunday, May 23, 2010 6:05 PM
    *To:* David Recordon; Mike Jones
    *Cc:* Johnny Bufu; Brad Fitzpatrick; openid-specs-council at lists.openid.net;
    Josh Hoyt; Dick Hardt
    *Subject:* Re: [OIDFSC] Refreshing the OpenID specs council



    Yes, I?d like to remain active on the specs council.

    In addition to Breno and Nat, I also think that Dirk Balfanz, Joseph Smarr,
    and John Bradley would also be really good additions.

    Allen


    On 5/23/10 5:49 PM, "David Recordon" wrote:

    Yes, I will remain active.

    On Sun, May 23, 2010 at 2:46 PM, Dick Hardt wrote:

    Yes, I will remain active on the specs council.

    On 2010-05-23, at 1:04 PM, Mike Jones wrote:

    As several OpenID working groups are being proposed, it would be good to
    ensure that the OpenID specifications council is populated with people who
    are currently active in specification development and have the appropriate
    expertise. Per this note <
    http://lists.openid.net/pipermail/openid-board/2008-June/002989.html> ,
    the council currently consists of these people, who are subscribed to the
    openid-specs-council list with these addresses:
    - Allen Tom atom at yahoo-inc.com <http://yahoo-inc.com>
    - Brad Fitzpatrick brad at danga.com <http://danga.com>
    - David Recordon recordond at gmail.com <http://gmail.com>
    - Johnny Bufu johnny.bufu at gmail.com <http://gmail.com>
    - Josh Hoyt josh at janrain.com <http://janrain.com>
    - Dick Hardt dick.hardt at gmail.com <http://gmail.com>
    - Mike Jones michael.jones at microsoft.com <http://microsoft.com>

    Can each of you who plan to remain active on the specifications council
    PLEASE RESPOND affirmatively to this note in the next few days? Otherwise,
    we should offer the positions to other spec editors who will be active. Nat
    Sakimura is certainly one person who comes to mind, as editor of the CX and
    Artifact Binding specifications, and also Breno de Medeiros, who is an
    editor for the User Interface Extension.

    To update your subscription to the openid-specs-council list, go to
    http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-specs-council.

    Thanks,
    -- Mike

    As a reminder of the role of the specifications council, here are some of
    the relevant passages from the OpenID Process document <
    http://openid.net/wordpress-content/uploads/2010/01/OpenID_Process_Document_December_2009_Final_Approved.pdf>
    :

    *1.4* ?*Editor(s)*? means, for a particular Specification to be developed
    by a particular WG, the individual Contributor(s) selected to coordinate
    development of, and transcription of the work of the WG for, such
    Specification, as well as (together with any other Editors for that WG) to
    administer WG operation.

    *1.5* ?*Eligible Editors*? means, as determined on a given date, all
    Editors from current WGs and all other persons who: (a) were WG Editors at
    any time in the two years before such date; (b) are alive and have provided
    and maintained updated contact information with the OpenID Foundation; and
    (c) elect to participate in selection of the Specifications Council after at
    least seven days? email notice.

    *1.6* ?*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). In the event that a
    Specifications Council member failed to participate in the discussion of two
    consecutive working group proposals, the member will be deemed to have
    resigned, and new specifications council members who are committed to
    participating in the process will be appointed to replace the member.


    *4.2 Review.* The Specifications Council will review each proposal
    within 15 days after receipt and promptly provide notice to
    specs at openid.net 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). 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.

    If no recommendation was issued within 15 days after receipt, the Proposal
    is deemed to be accepted.

    When the Specifications Council rejects the proposal, the Proposers may
    submit the Proposal to a vote of the OIDF membership, in accordance with the
    voting procedures in ?3. When the vote passes, the proposal is deemed to be
    accepted.



    -------------- next part --------------
    An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
    URL: <http://lists.openid.net/pipermail/openid-specs-council/attachments/20100525/ce66684a/attachment-0001.html>
  • Breno de Medeiros at May 25, 2010 at 4:57 pm
    For the record, Dirk Balfanz is also a spec editor for the hybrid
    extension (as I am myself), so he is eligible by these criteria.
    On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 09:42, David Recordon wrote:
    Given that the UX Extension was never finalized, I think everyone is on a
    level playing field.
    The Specs Council is made up of two people appointed by the Board and five
    by the "Eligible Editors". The Editors are supposed to select among
    themselves, but can appoint other appropriate people as well.
    I'd?recommend?adding Nat and Joseph given that the Hybrid extension has had
    more deployment than UX and his experience editing other specifications such
    as Portable Contacts.
    --David
    On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 10:26 AM, Mike Jones wrote:

    At this point, we have affirmative responses from all but Brad and Josh.
    I propose that we now invite Breno and Nat to join the council to replace
    Brad and Josh.



    I agree that Dirk, Joseph, and John all bring strong qualifications, but
    to my knowledge, none have served as OpenID specification editors, whereas
    Breno and Nat have.



    Are there any objections to now inviting them to join?



    ??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? -- Mike



    From: openid-specs-council-bounces at lists.openid.net
    [mailto:openid-specs-council-bounces at lists.openid.net] On Behalf Of Allen
    Tom
    Sent: Sunday, May 23, 2010 6:05 PM
    To: David Recordon; Mike Jones
    Cc: Johnny Bufu; Brad Fitzpatrick; openid-specs-council at lists.openid.net;
    Josh Hoyt; Dick Hardt
    Subject: Re: [OIDFSC] Refreshing the OpenID specs council



    Yes, I?d like to remain active on the specs council.

    In addition to Breno and Nat, I also think that Dirk Balfanz, Joseph
    Smarr, and John Bradley would also be really good additions.

    Allen


    On 5/23/10 5:49 PM, "David Recordon" wrote:

    Yes, I will remain active.

    On Sun, May 23, 2010 at 2:46 PM, Dick Hardt wrote:

    Yes, I will remain active on the specs council.

    On 2010-05-23, at 1:04 PM, Mike Jones wrote:

    As several OpenID working groups are being proposed, it would be good to
    ensure that the OpenID specifications council is populated with people who
    are currently active in specification development and have the appropriate
    expertise.? Per?this note
    <http://lists.openid.net/pipermail/openid-board/2008-June/002989.html> , the
    council currently consists of these people, who are subscribed to the
    openid-specs-council list with these addresses:
    ? - Allen Tom? atom at?yahoo-inc.com <http://yahoo-inc.com>
    ? - Brad Fitzpatrick? brad at?danga.com <http://danga.com>
    ? - David Recordon? recordond at?gmail.com <http://gmail.com>
    ? - Johnny Bufu? johnny.bufu at?gmail.com <http://gmail.com>
    ? - Josh Hoyt? josh at?janrain.com <http://janrain.com>
    ? - Dick Hardt ?dick.hardt at?gmail.com <http://gmail.com>
    ? - Mike Jones? michael.jones at?microsoft.com <http://microsoft.com>

    Can each of you who plan to remain active on the specifications council
    PLEASE RESPOND affirmatively to this note in the next few days?? Otherwise,
    we should offer the positions to other spec editors who will be active.? Nat
    Sakimura is certainly one person who comes to mind, as editor of the CX and
    Artifact Binding specifications, and also Breno de Medeiros, who is an
    editor for the User Interface Extension.

    To update your subscription to the openid-specs-council list, go
    to?http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-specs-council.

    ??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Thanks,
    ??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? -- Mike

    As a reminder of the role of the specifications council, here are some of
    the relevant passages from the?OpenID Process document
    <http://openid.net/wordpress-content/uploads/2010/01/OpenID_Process_Document_December_2009_Final_Approved.pdf>
    :

    1.4? ?Editor(s)? means, for a particular Specification to be developed by
    a particular WG, the individual Contributor(s) selected to coordinate
    development of, and transcription of the work of the WG for, such
    Specification, as well as (together with any other Editors for that WG) to
    administer WG operation.

    1.5? ?Eligible Editors? means, as determined on a given date, all Editors
    from current WGs and all other persons who: (a)?were WG Editors at any time
    in the two years before such date; (b)?are alive and have provided and
    maintained updated contact information with the OpenID Foundation; and
    (c)?elect to participate in selection of the Specifications Council after at
    least seven days? email notice.

    1.6? ?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). In the event that a
    Specifications Council member failed to participate in the discussion of two
    consecutive working group proposals, the member will be deemed to have
    resigned, and new specifications council members who are committed to
    participating in the process will be appointed to replace the member.


    4.2? Review.? The Specifications Council will review each proposal within
    15 days after receipt and promptly provide notice to?specs at openid.net?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). 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.

    If no recommendation was issued within 15 days after receipt, the Proposal
    is deemed to be accepted.

    When the Specifications Council rejects the proposal, the Proposers may
    submit the Proposal to a vote of the OIDF membership, in accordance with the
    voting procedures in ?3. When the vote passes, the proposal is deemed to be
    accepted.




    --
    --Breno

    +1 (650) 214-1007 desk
    +1 (408) 212-0135 (Grand Central)
    MTV-41-3 : 383-A
    PST (GMT-8) / PDT(GMT-7)
  • Mike Jones at May 26, 2010 at 12:42 am
    That's my understanding of the process as well, David. It sounds like we may already have consensus on Nat. I hope we choose the remaining member by consensus as well. I would personally be fine with either Breno or Joseph for the remaining member. What do others think?

    For reference, the relevant definitions from the process doc are:

    1.5 "Eligible Editors" means, as determined on a given date, all Editors from current WGs and all other persons who: (a) were WG Editors at any time in the two years before such date; (b) are alive and have provided and maintained updated contact information with the OpenID Foundation; and (c) elect to participate in selection of the Specifications Council after at least seven days' email notice.

    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).

    Here's a start at an informal list of who the eligible editors are that should select the remaining specs council member, should we not reach consensus without a vote or more formal process.

    ? From PAPE: David Recordon and I did most of the actual editing by my recollection, with Johnny Bufu and Jonathan Daugherty also listed as editors.

    ? From UI: Allen Tom, Breno de Medeiros

    ? From CX: Nat Sakimura

    ? From Artifact: Nat Sakimura. Is John Bradley also an editor too? It's hard to tell from the spec draft.

    ? From Hybrid: Dirk Balfanz, Breno de Medeiros, David Recordon, Joseph Smarr, Allen Tom

    ? From AX 1.1: Allen Tom, Breno de Medeiros
    I may have missed specs and editors, and if so, others should speak up.

    I believe that the other specs are all older than two years ago and/or don't have current working groups, although I wouldn't be opposed to including input from editors of the older specs as part of a consensus-based selection process.

    -- Mike

    P.S. I added Jonathan Daugherty and John Bradley to this thread, since they appear to be eligible editors.

    From: David Recordon [mailto:recordond at gmail.com]
    Sent: Tuesday, May 25, 2010 9:43 AM
    To: Mike Jones
    Cc: Allen Tom; Johnny Bufu; openid-specs-council at lists.openid.net; Josh Hoyt; Dick Hardt; Breno de Medeiros; Nat Sakimura; Joseph Smarr
    Subject: Re: Refreshing the OpenID specs council

    Given that the UX Extension was never finalized, I think everyone is on a level playing field.

    The Specs Council is made up of two people appointed by the Board and five by the "Eligible Editors". The Editors are supposed to select among themselves, but can appoint other appropriate people as well.

    I'd recommend adding Nat and Joseph given that the Hybrid extension has had more deployment than UX and his experience editing other specifications such as Portable Contacts.

    --David

    On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 10:26 AM, Mike Jones <Michael.Jones at microsoft.comwrote:
    At this point, we have affirmative responses from all but Brad and Josh. I propose that we now invite Breno and Nat to join the council to replace Brad and Josh.

    I agree that Dirk, Joseph, and John all bring strong qualifications, but to my knowledge, none have served as OpenID specification editors, whereas Breno and Nat have.

    Are there any objections to now inviting them to join?

    -- Mike

    From: openid-specs-council-bounces at lists.openid.net[mailto:openid-specs-council-bounces at lists.openid.net<mailto:openid-specs-council-bounces at lists.openid.net>] On Behalf Of Allen Tom
    Sent: Sunday, May 23, 2010 6:05 PM
    To: David Recordon; Mike Jones
    Cc: Johnny Bufu; Brad Fitzpatrick; openid-specs-council at lists.openid.net<mailto:openid-specs-council at lists.openid.net>; Josh Hoyt; Dick Hardt
    Subject: Re: [OIDFSC] Refreshing the OpenID specs council

    Yes, I'd like to remain active on the specs council.

    In addition to Breno and Nat, I also think that Dirk Balfanz, Joseph Smarr, and John Bradley would also be really good additions.

    Allen


    On 5/23/10 5:49 PM, "David Recordon" <recordond at gmail.comwrote:
    Yes, I will remain active.

    On Sun, May 23, 2010 at 2:46 PM, Dick Hardt <dick.hardt at gmail.comwrote:
    Yes, I will remain active on the specs council.

    On 2010-05-23, at 1:04 PM, Mike Jones wrote:
    As several OpenID working groups are being proposed, it would be good to ensure that the OpenID specifications council is populated with people who are currently active in specification development and have the appropriate expertise. Per this note <http://lists.openid.net/pipermail/openid-board/2008-June/002989.html> , the council currently consists of these people, who are subscribed to the openid-specs-council list with these addresses:
    - Allen Tom atom at yahoo-inc.com<http://yahoo-inc.com> <http://yahoo-inc.com>
    - Brad Fitzpatrick brad at danga.com<http://danga.com> <http://danga.com>
    - David Recordon recordond at gmail.com<http://gmail.com> <http://gmail.com>
    - Johnny Bufu johnny.bufu at gmail.com<http://gmail.com> <http://gmail.com>
    - Josh Hoyt josh at janrain.com<http://janrain.com> <http://janrain.com>
    - Dick Hardt dick.hardt at gmail.com<http://gmail.com> <http://gmail.com>
    - Mike Jones michael.jones at microsoft.com<http://microsoft.com> <http://microsoft.com>

    Can each of you who plan to remain active on the specifications council PLEASE RESPOND affirmatively to this note in the next few days? Otherwise, we should offer the positions to other spec editors who will be active. Nat Sakimura is certainly one person who comes to mind, as editor of the CX and Artifact Binding specifications, and also Breno de Medeiros, who is an editor for the User Interface Extension.

    To update your subscription to the openid-specs-council list, go to http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-specs-council.

    Thanks,
    -- Mike

    As a reminder of the role of the specifications council, here are some of the relevant passages from the OpenID Process document <http://openid.net/wordpress-content/uploads/2010/01/OpenID_Process_Document_December_2009_Final_Approved.pdf> :

    1.4 "Editor(s)" means, for a particular Specification to be developed by a particular WG, the individual Contributor(s) selected to coordinate development of, and transcription of the work of the WG for, such Specification, as well as (together with any other Editors for that WG) to administer WG operation.

    1.5 "Eligible Editors" means, as determined on a given date, all Editors from current WGs and all other persons who: (a) were WG Editors at any time in the two years before such date; (b) are alive and have provided and maintained updated contact information with the OpenID Foundation; and (c) elect to participate in selection of the Specifications Council after at least seven days' email notice.

    1.6 "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). In the event that a Specifications Council member failed to participate in the discussion of two consecutive working group proposals, the member will be deemed to have resigned, and new specifications council members who are committed to participating in the process will be appointed to replace the member.


    4.2 Review. The Specifications Council will review each proposal within 15 days after receipt and promptly provide notice to specs at openid.net<http://specs at openid.net> 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). 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.

    If no recommendation was issued within 15 days after receipt, the Proposal is deemed to be accepted.

    When the Specifications Council rejects the proposal, the Proposers may submit the Proposal to a vote of the OIDF membership, in accordance with the voting procedures in ?3. When the vote passes, the proposal is deemed to be accepted.



    -------------- next part --------------
    An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
    URL: <http://lists.openid.net/pipermail/openid-specs-council/attachments/20100526/04281d45/attachment-0001.html>
  • John Bradley at May 26, 2010 at 1:28 am
    I am helping Nat but he is the editor. The closest I have come was the ICAM profile, but that is not a openID spec.

    FWIW I think Joseph or Breno would do a fine job. A slight preference for Breno because he is a fellow south American:)

    John B.
    On 2010-05-25, at 8:42 PM, Mike Jones wrote:

    That?s my understanding of the process as well, David. It sounds like we may already have consensus on Nat. I hope we choose the remaining member by consensus as well. I would personally be fine with either Breno or Joseph for the remaining member. What do others think?

    For reference, the relevant definitions from the process doc are:
    1.5 ?Eligible Editors? means, as determined on a given date, all Editors from current WGs and all other persons who: (a) were WG Editors at any time in the two years before such date; (b) are alive and have provided and maintained updated contact information with the OpenID Foundation; and (c) elect to participate in selection of the Specifications Council after at least seven days? email notice.

    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).


    Here?s a start at an informal list of who the eligible editors are that should select the remaining specs council member, should we not reach consensus without a vote or more formal process.
    ? From PAPE: David Recordon and I did most of the actual editing by my recollection, with Johnny Bufu and Jonathan Daugherty also listed as editors.
    ? From UI: Allen Tom, Breno de Medeiros
    ? From CX: Nat Sakimura
    ? From Artifact: Nat Sakimura. Is John Bradley also an editor too? It?s hard to tell from the spec draft.
    ? From Hybrid: Dirk Balfanz, Breno de Medeiros, David Recordon, Joseph Smarr, Allen Tom
    ? From AX 1.1: Allen Tom, Breno de Medeiros
    I may have missed specs and editors, and if so, others should speak up.

    I believe that the other specs are all older than two years ago and/or don?t have current working groups, although I wouldn?t be opposed to including input from editors of the older specs as part of a consensus-based selection process.

    -- Mike

    P.S. I added Jonathan Daugherty and John Bradley to this thread, since they appear to be eligible editors.

    From: David Recordon [mailto:recordond at gmail.com]
    Sent: Tuesday, May 25, 2010 9:43 AM
    To: Mike Jones
    Cc: Allen Tom; Johnny Bufu; openid-specs-council at lists.openid.net; Josh Hoyt; Dick Hardt; Breno de Medeiros; Nat Sakimura; Joseph Smarr
    Subject: Re: Refreshing the OpenID specs council

    Given that the UX Extension was never finalized, I think everyone is on a level playing field.

    The Specs Council is made up of two people appointed by the Board and five by the "Eligible Editors". The Editors are supposed to select among themselves, but can appoint other appropriate people as well.

    I'd recommend adding Nat and Joseph given that the Hybrid extension has had more deployment than UX and his experience editing other specifications such as Portable Contacts.

    --David


    On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 10:26 AM, Mike Jones wrote:
    At this point, we have affirmative responses from all but Brad and Josh. I propose that we now invite Breno and Nat to join the council to replace Brad and Josh.

    I agree that Dirk, Joseph, and John all bring strong qualifications, but to my knowledge, none have served as OpenID specification editors, whereas Breno and Nat have.

    Are there any objections to now inviting them to join?

    -- Mike

    From: openid-specs-council-bounces at lists.openid.net [mailto:openid-specs-council-bounces at lists.openid.net] On Behalf Of Allen Tom
    Sent: Sunday, May 23, 2010 6:05 PM
    To: David Recordon; Mike Jones
    Cc: Johnny Bufu; Brad Fitzpatrick; openid-specs-council at lists.openid.net; Josh Hoyt; Dick Hardt
    Subject: Re: [OIDFSC] Refreshing the OpenID specs council

    Yes, I?d like to remain active on the specs council.

    In addition to Breno and Nat, I also think that Dirk Balfanz, Joseph Smarr, and John Bradley would also be really good additions.

    Allen


    On 5/23/10 5:49 PM, "David Recordon" wrote:

    Yes, I will remain active.

    On Sun, May 23, 2010 at 2:46 PM, Dick Hardt wrote:
    Yes, I will remain active on the specs council.

    On 2010-05-23, at 1:04 PM, Mike Jones wrote:

    As several OpenID working groups are being proposed, it would be good to ensure that the OpenID specifications council is populated with people who are currently active in specification development and have the appropriate expertise. Per this note <http://lists.openid.net/pipermail/openid-board/2008-June/002989.html> , the council currently consists of these people, who are subscribed to the openid-specs-council list with these addresses:
    - Allen Tom atom at yahoo-inc.com <http://yahoo-inc.com>
    - Brad Fitzpatrick brad at danga.com <http://danga.com>
    - David Recordon recordond at gmail.com <http://gmail.com>
    - Johnny Bufu johnny.bufu at gmail.com <http://gmail.com>
    - Josh Hoyt josh at janrain.com <http://janrain.com>
    - Dick Hardt dick.hardt at gmail.com <http://gmail.com>
    - Mike Jones michael.jones at microsoft.com <http://microsoft.com>

    Can each of you who plan to remain active on the specifications council PLEASE RESPOND affirmatively to this note in the next few days? Otherwise, we should offer the positions to other spec editors who will be active. Nat Sakimura is certainly one person who comes to mind, as editor of the CX and Artifact Binding specifications, and also Breno de Medeiros, who is an editor for the User Interface Extension.

    To update your subscription to the openid-specs-council list, go to http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-specs-council.

    Thanks,
    -- Mike

    As a reminder of the role of the specifications council, here are some of the relevant passages from the OpenID Process document <http://openid.net/wordpress-content/uploads/2010/01/OpenID_Process_Document_December_2009_Final_Approved.pdf> :

    1.4 ?Editor(s)? means, for a particular Specification to be developed by a particular WG, the individual Contributor(s) selected to coordinate development of, and transcription of the work of the WG for, such Specification, as well as (together with any other Editors for that WG) to administer WG operation.

    1.5 ?Eligible Editors? means, as determined on a given date, all Editors from current WGs and all other persons who: (a) were WG Editors at any time in the two years before such date; (b) are alive and have provided and maintained updated contact information with the OpenID Foundation; and (c) elect to participate in selection of the Specifications Council after at least seven days? email notice.

    1.6 ?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). In the event that a Specifications Council member failed to participate in the discussion of two consecutive working group proposals, the member will be deemed to have resigned, and new specifications council members who are committed to participating in the process will be appointed to replace the member.


    4.2 Review. The Specifications Council will review each proposal within 15 days after receipt and promptly provide notice to specs at openid.net 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). 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.

    If no recommendation was issued within 15 days after receipt, the Proposal is deemed to be accepted.

    When the Specifications Council rejects the proposal, the Proposers may submit the Proposal to a vote of the OIDF membership, in accordance with the voting procedures in ?3. When the vote passes, the proposal is deemed to be accepted.


    -------------- next part --------------
    An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
    URL: <http://lists.openid.net/pipermail/openid-specs-council/attachments/20100525/1061bfe5/attachment-0001.html>
    -------------- next part --------------
    A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
    Name: smime.p7s
    Type: application/pkcs7-signature
    Size: 4767 bytes
    Desc: not available
    URL: <http://lists.openid.net/pipermail/openid-specs-council/attachments/20100525/1061bfe5/attachment-0001.bin>
  • Dick Hardt at May 26, 2010 at 5:14 am
    Breno looks to have more breadth of experience, so I would give Breno a slight edge. They both work at Google, so no difference there. :)
    On 2010-05-25, at 7:28 PM, John Bradley wrote:

    I am helping Nat but he is the editor. The closest I have come was the ICAM profile, but that is not a openID spec.

    FWIW I think Joseph or Breno would do a fine job. A slight preference for Breno because he is a fellow south American:)

    John B.
    On 2010-05-25, at 8:42 PM, Mike Jones wrote:

    That?s my understanding of the process as well, David. It sounds like we may already have consensus on Nat. I hope we choose the remaining member by consensus as well. I would personally be fine with either Breno or Joseph for the remaining member. What do others think?

    For reference, the relevant definitions from the process doc are:
    1.5 ?Eligible Editors? means, as determined on a given date, all Editors from current WGs and all other persons who: (a) were WG Editors at any time in the two years before such date; (b) are alive and have provided and maintained updated contact information with the OpenID Foundation; and (c) elect to participate in selection of the Specifications Council after at least seven days? email notice.

    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).


    Here?s a start at an informal list of who the eligible editors are that should select the remaining specs council member, should we not reach consensus without a vote or more formal process.
    ? From PAPE: David Recordon and I did most of the actual editing by my recollection, with Johnny Bufu and Jonathan Daugherty also listed as editors.
    ? From UI: Allen Tom, Breno de Medeiros
    ? From CX: Nat Sakimura
    ? From Artifact: Nat Sakimura. Is John Bradley also an editor too? It?s hard to tell from the spec draft.
    ? From Hybrid: Dirk Balfanz, Breno de Medeiros, David Recordon, Joseph Smarr, Allen Tom
    ? From AX 1.1: Allen Tom, Breno de Medeiros
    I may have missed specs and editors, and if so, others should speak up.

    I believe that the other specs are all older than two years ago and/or don?t have current working groups, although I wouldn?t be opposed to including input from editors of the older specs as part of a consensus-based selection process.

    -- Mike

    P.S. I added Jonathan Daugherty and John Bradley to this thread, since they appear to be eligible editors.

    From: David Recordon [mailto:recordond at gmail.com]
    Sent: Tuesday, May 25, 2010 9:43 AM
    To: Mike Jones
    Cc: Allen Tom; Johnny Bufu; openid-specs-council at lists.openid.net; Josh Hoyt; Dick Hardt; Breno de Medeiros; Nat Sakimura; Joseph Smarr
    Subject: Re: Refreshing the OpenID specs council

    Given that the UX Extension was never finalized, I think everyone is on a level playing field.

    The Specs Council is made up of two people appointed by the Board and five by the "Eligible Editors". The Editors are supposed to select among themselves, but can appoint other appropriate people as well.

    I'd recommend adding Nat and Joseph given that the Hybrid extension has had more deployment than UX and his experience editing other specifications such as Portable Contacts.

    --David


    On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 10:26 AM, Mike Jones wrote:
    At this point, we have affirmative responses from all but Brad and Josh. I propose that we now invite Breno and Nat to join the council to replace Brad and Josh.

    I agree that Dirk, Joseph, and John all bring strong qualifications, but to my knowledge, none have served as OpenID specification editors, whereas Breno and Nat have.

    Are there any objections to now inviting them to join?

    -- Mike

    From: openid-specs-council-bounces at lists.openid.net [mailto:openid-specs-council-bounces at lists.openid.net] On Behalf Of Allen Tom
    Sent: Sunday, May 23, 2010 6:05 PM
    To: David Recordon; Mike Jones
    Cc: Johnny Bufu; Brad Fitzpatrick; openid-specs-council at lists.openid.net; Josh Hoyt; Dick Hardt
    Subject: Re: [OIDFSC] Refreshing the OpenID specs council

    Yes, I?d like to remain active on the specs council.

    In addition to Breno and Nat, I also think that Dirk Balfanz, Joseph Smarr, and John Bradley would also be really good additions.

    Allen


    On 5/23/10 5:49 PM, "David Recordon" wrote:

    Yes, I will remain active.

    On Sun, May 23, 2010 at 2:46 PM, Dick Hardt wrote:
    Yes, I will remain active on the specs council.

    On 2010-05-23, at 1:04 PM, Mike Jones wrote:

    As several OpenID working groups are being proposed, it would be good to ensure that the OpenID specifications council is populated with people who are currently active in specification development and have the appropriate expertise. Per this note <http://lists.openid.net/pipermail/openid-board/2008-June/002989.html> , the council currently consists of these people, who are subscribed to the openid-specs-council list with these addresses:
    - Allen Tom atom at yahoo-inc.com <http://yahoo-inc.com>
    - Brad Fitzpatrick brad at danga.com <http://danga.com>
    - David Recordon recordond at gmail.com <http://gmail.com>
    - Johnny Bufu johnny.bufu at gmail.com <http://gmail.com>
    - Josh Hoyt josh at janrain.com <http://janrain.com>
    - Dick Hardt dick.hardt at gmail.com <http://gmail.com>
    - Mike Jones michael.jones at microsoft.com <http://microsoft.com>

    Can each of you who plan to remain active on the specifications council PLEASE RESPOND affirmatively to this note in the next few days? Otherwise, we should offer the positions to other spec editors who will be active. Nat Sakimura is certainly one person who comes to mind, as editor of the CX and Artifact Binding specifications, and also Breno de Medeiros, who is an editor for the User Interface Extension.

    To update your subscription to the openid-specs-council list, go to http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-specs-council.

    Thanks,
    -- Mike

    As a reminder of the role of the specifications council, here are some of the relevant passages from the OpenID Process document <http://openid.net/wordpress-content/uploads/2010/01/OpenID_Process_Document_December_2009_Final_Approved.pdf> :

    1.4 ?Editor(s)? means, for a particular Specification to be developed by a particular WG, the individual Contributor(s) selected to coordinate development of, and transcription of the work of the WG for, such Specification, as well as (together with any other Editors for that WG) to administer WG operation.

    1.5 ?Eligible Editors? means, as determined on a given date, all Editors from current WGs and all other persons who: (a) were WG Editors at any time in the two years before such date; (b) are alive and have provided and maintained updated contact information with the OpenID Foundation; and (c) elect to participate in selection of the Specifications Council after at least seven days? email notice.

    1.6 ?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). In the event that a Specifications Council member failed to participate in the discussion of two consecutive working group proposals, the member will be deemed to have resigned, and new specifications council members who are committed to participating in the process will be appointed to replace the member.


    4.2 Review. The Specifications Council will review each proposal within 15 days after receipt and promptly provide notice to specs at openid.net 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). 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.

    If no recommendation was issued within 15 days after receipt, the Proposal is deemed to be accepted.

    When the Specifications Council rejects the proposal, the Proposers may submit the Proposal to a vote of the OIDF membership, in accordance with the voting procedures in ?3. When the vote passes, the proposal is deemed to be accepted.


    -------------- next part --------------
    An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
    URL: <http://lists.openid.net/pipermail/openid-specs-council/attachments/20100525/e7e2f2b2/attachment-0001.html>
  • Allen Tom at May 27, 2010 at 12:24 am
    I think John, Breno, and Joseph all would be fine additions to the specs
    council.

    Since Breno is a security expert, he would be a good choice to help drive
    security issues. Because of Joesph?s work at Plaxo, he definitely has a lot
    of experience with Auth APIs and services from a large number of providers.

    I don?t think we ever formally asked Joseph or Breno they?d like to serve on
    the specifications council. Are you guys both interested in filling the
    vacant position?

    Allen



    On 5/25/10 10:14 PM, "Dick Hardt" wrote:

    Breno looks to have more breadth of experience, so I would give Breno a slight
    edge. They both work at Google, so no difference there. :)
    On 2010-05-25, at 7:28 PM, John Bradley wrote:

    I am helping Nat but he is the editor. The closest I have come was the ICAM
    profile, but that is not a openID spec.

    FWIW I think Joseph or Breno would do a fine job. A slight preference for
    Breno because he is a fellow south American:)

    John B.
    On 2010-05-25, at 8:42 PM, Mike Jones wrote:

    That?s my understanding of the process as well, David. It sounds like we
    may already have consensus on Nat. I hope we choose the remaining member by
    consensus as well. I would personally be fine with either Breno or Joseph
    for the remaining member. What do others think?

    For reference, the relevant definitions from the process doc are:
    1.5 ?Eligible Editors? means, as determined on a given date, all Editors
    from current WGs and all other persons who: (a) were WG Editors at any time
    in the two years before such date; (b) are alive and have provided and
    maintained updated contact information with the OpenID Foundation; and (c)
    elect to participate in selection of the Specifications Council after at
    least seven days? email notice.

    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).


    Here?s a start at an informal list of who the eligible editors are that
    should select the remaining specs council member, should we not reach
    consensus without a vote or more formal process.
    ? From PAPE: David Recordon and I did most of the actual editing by
    my recollection, with Johnny Bufu and Jonathan Daugherty also listed as
    editors.
    ? From UI: Allen Tom, Breno de Medeiros
    ? From CX: Nat Sakimura
    ? From Artifact: Nat Sakimura. Is John Bradley also an editor too?
    It?s hard to tell from the spec draft.
    ? From Hybrid: Dirk Balfanz, Breno de Medeiros, David Recordon,
    Joseph Smarr, Allen Tom
    ? From AX 1.1: Allen Tom, Breno de Medeiros
    I may have missed specs and editors, and if so, others should speak up.

    I believe that the other specs are all older than two years ago and/or don?t
    have current working groups, although I wouldn?t be opposed to including
    input from editors of the older specs as part of a consensus-based selection
    process.

    -- Mike

    P.S. I added Jonathan Daugherty and John Bradley to this thread, since they
    appear to be eligible editors.

    From: David Recordon [mailto:recordond at gmail.com]
    Sent: Tuesday, May 25, 2010 9:43 AM
    To: Mike Jones
    Cc: Allen Tom; Johnny Bufu; openid-specs-council at lists.openid.net; Josh
    Hoyt; Dick Hardt; Breno de Medeiros; Nat Sakimura; Joseph Smarr
    Subject: Re: Refreshing the OpenID specs council

    Given that the UX Extension was never finalized, I think everyone is on a
    level playing field.

    The Specs Council is made up of two people appointed by the Board and five
    by the "Eligible Editors". The Editors are supposed to select among
    themselves, but can appoint other appropriate people as well.

    I'd recommend adding Nat and Joseph given that the Hybrid extension has had
    more deployment than UX and his experience editing other specifications such
    as Portable Contacts.

    --David


    On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 10:26 AM, Mike Jones <Michael.Jones at microsoft.com>
    wrote:
    At this point, we have affirmative responses from all but Brad and Josh. I
    propose that we now invite Breno and Nat to join the council to replace Brad
    and Josh.

    I agree that Dirk, Joseph, and John all bring strong qualifications, but to
    my knowledge, none have served as OpenID specification editors, whereas
    Breno and Nat have.

    Are there any objections to now inviting them to join?

    -- Mike

    From: openid-specs-council-bounces at lists.openid.net
    [mailto:openid-specs-council-bounces at lists.openid.net] On Behalf Of Allen
    Tom
    Sent: Sunday, May 23, 2010 6:05 PM
    To: David Recordon; Mike Jones
    Cc: Johnny Bufu; Brad Fitzpatrick; openid-specs-council at lists.openid.net;
    Josh Hoyt; Dick Hardt
    Subject: Re: [OIDFSC] Refreshing the OpenID specs council

    Yes, I?d like to remain active on the specs council.

    In addition to Breno and Nat, I also think that Dirk Balfanz, Joseph Smarr,
    and John Bradley would also be really good additions.

    Allen


    On 5/23/10 5:49 PM, "David Recordon" <recordond at gmail.com
    wrote:
    Yes, I will remain active.

    On Sun, May 23, 2010 at 2:46 PM, Dick Hardt <dick.hardt at gmail.com
    wrote:
    Yes, I will remain active on the specs council.

    On 2010-05-23, at 1:04 PM, Mike Jones wrote:
    As several OpenID working groups are being proposed, it would be good to
    ensure that the OpenID specifications council is populated with people who
    are currently active in specification development and have the appropriate
    expertise. Per this note
    <http://lists.openid.net/pipermail/openid-board/2008-June/002989.html> , the
    council currently consists of these people, who are subscribed to the
    openid-specs-council list with these addresses:
    - Allen Tom atom at yahoo-inc.com <http://yahoo-inc.com/>
    <http://yahoo-inc.com <http://yahoo-inc.com/> >
    - Brad Fitzpatrick brad at danga.com <http://danga.com/>
    <http://danga.com <http://danga.com/> >
    - David Recordon recordond at gmail.com <http://gmail.com/>
    <http://gmail.com <http://gmail.com/> >
    - Johnny Bufu johnny.bufu at gmail.com <http://gmail.com/>
    <http://gmail.com <http://gmail.com/> >
    - Josh Hoyt josh at janrain.com <http://janrain.com/>
    <http://janrain.com <http://janrain.com/> >
    - Dick Hardt dick.hardt at gmail.com <http://gmail.com/>
    <http://gmail.com <http://gmail.com/> >
    - Mike Jones michael.jones at microsoft.com <http://microsoft.com/>
    <http://microsoft.com <http://microsoft.com/> >

    Can each of you who plan to remain active on the specifications council
    PLEASE RESPOND affirmatively to this note in the next few days? Otherwise,
    we should offer the positions to other spec editors who will be active. Nat
    Sakimura is certainly one person who comes to mind, as editor of the CX and
    Artifact Binding specifications, and also Breno de Medeiros, who is an
    editor for the User Interface Extension.

    To update your subscription to the openid-specs-council list, go to
    http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-specs-council.

    Thanks,
    -- Mike

    As a reminder of the role of the specifications council, here are some of
    the relevant passages from the OpenID Process document
    <http://openid.net/wordpress-content/uploads/2010/01/OpenID_Process_Document
    _December_2009_Final_Approved.pdf> :

    1.4 ?Editor(s)? means, for a particular Specification to be developed by a
    particular WG, the individual Contributor(s) selected to coordinate
    development of, and transcription of the work of the WG for, such
    Specification, as well as (together with any other Editors for that WG) to
    administer WG operation.

    1.5 ?Eligible Editors? means, as determined on a given date, all Editors
    from current WGs and all other persons who: (a) were WG Editors at any time
    in the two years before such date; (b) are alive and have provided and
    maintained updated contact information with the OpenID Foundation; and (c)
    elect to participate in selection of the Specifications Council after at
    least seven days? email notice.

    1.6 ?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). In the event that a
    Specifications Council member failed to participate in the discussion of two
    consecutive working group proposals, the member will be deemed to have
    resigned, and new specifications council members who are committed to
    participating in the process will be appointed to replace the member.


    4.2 Review. The Specifications Council will review each proposal within 15
    days after receipt and promptly provide notice to specs at openid.net
    <http://specs at openid.net/> 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). 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.

    If no recommendation was issued within 15 days after receipt, the Proposal
    is deemed to be accepted.

    When the Specifications Council rejects the proposal, the Proposers may
    submit the Proposal to a vote of the OIDF membership, in accordance with the
    voting procedures in ?3. When the vote passes, the proposal is deemed to be
    accepted.

    -------------- next part --------------
    An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
    URL: <http://lists.openid.net/pipermail/openid-specs-council/attachments/20100526/a9360048/attachment-0001.html>
  • Martin Atkins at May 27, 2010 at 12:58 am

    On 05/26/2010 05:24 PM, Allen Tom wrote:
    I think John, Breno, and Joseph all would be fine additions to the specs
    council.

    Since Breno is a security expert, he would be a good choice to help
    drive security issues. Because of Joesph?s work at Plaxo, he definitely
    has a lot of experience with Auth APIs and services from a large number
    of providers.
    While I certainly am not arguing that Breno shouldn't be on the specs
    council, I don't think security expertise is a relevant consideration
    here since it's primary purpose is to veto working groups based on
    non-technical criteria, before technical work has begun.

    Security experts make useful working group members, but this is not a
    skill needed for specs council membership.
  • Brad Fitzpatrick at May 25, 2010 at 4:50 pm
    Yeah, I no longer need to be involved.

    Or, in council speak:

    +1

    (or is that -1?)

    In any case, there are surely better replacements for me. :-)
    On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 9:26 AM, Mike Jones wrote:

    At this point, we have affirmative responses from all but Brad and Josh.
    I propose that we now invite Breno and Nat to join the council to replace
    Brad and Josh.



    I agree that Dirk, Joseph, and John all bring strong qualifications, but to
    my knowledge, none have served as OpenID specification editors, whereas
    Breno and Nat have.



    Are there any objections to now inviting them to join?



    -- Mike



    *From:* openid-specs-council-bounces at lists.openid.net [mailto:
    openid-specs-council-bounces at lists.openid.net] *On Behalf Of *Allen Tom
    *Sent:* Sunday, May 23, 2010 6:05 PM
    *To:* David Recordon; Mike Jones
    *Cc:* Johnny Bufu; Brad Fitzpatrick; openid-specs-council at lists.openid.net;
    Josh Hoyt; Dick Hardt
    *Subject:* Re: [OIDFSC] Refreshing the OpenID specs council



    Yes, I?d like to remain active on the specs council.

    In addition to Breno and Nat, I also think that Dirk Balfanz, Joseph Smarr,
    and John Bradley would also be really good additions.

    Allen


    On 5/23/10 5:49 PM, "David Recordon" wrote:

    Yes, I will remain active.

    On Sun, May 23, 2010 at 2:46 PM, Dick Hardt wrote:

    Yes, I will remain active on the specs council.

    On 2010-05-23, at 1:04 PM, Mike Jones wrote:

    As several OpenID working groups are being proposed, it would be good to
    ensure that the OpenID specifications council is populated with people who
    are currently active in specification development and have the appropriate
    expertise. Per this note <
    http://lists.openid.net/pipermail/openid-board/2008-June/002989.html> ,
    the council currently consists of these people, who are subscribed to the
    openid-specs-council list with these addresses:
    - Allen Tom atom at yahoo-inc.com <http://yahoo-inc.com>
    - Brad Fitzpatrick brad at danga.com <http://danga.com>
    - David Recordon recordond at gmail.com <http://gmail.com>
    - Johnny Bufu johnny.bufu at gmail.com <http://gmail.com>
    - Josh Hoyt josh at janrain.com <http://janrain.com>
    - Dick Hardt dick.hardt at gmail.com <http://gmail.com>
    - Mike Jones michael.jones at microsoft.com <http://microsoft.com>

    Can each of you who plan to remain active on the specifications council
    PLEASE RESPOND affirmatively to this note in the next few days? Otherwise,
    we should offer the positions to other spec editors who will be active. Nat
    Sakimura is certainly one person who comes to mind, as editor of the CX and
    Artifact Binding specifications, and also Breno de Medeiros, who is an
    editor for the User Interface Extension.

    To update your subscription to the openid-specs-council list, go to
    http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-specs-council.

    Thanks,
    -- Mike

    As a reminder of the role of the specifications council, here are some of
    the relevant passages from the OpenID Process document <
    http://openid.net/wordpress-content/uploads/2010/01/OpenID_Process_Document_December_2009_Final_Approved.pdf>
    :

    *1.4* ?*Editor(s)*? means, for a particular Specification to be developed
    by a particular WG, the individual Contributor(s) selected to coordinate
    development of, and transcription of the work of the WG for, such
    Specification, as well as (together with any other Editors for that WG) to
    administer WG operation.

    *1.5* ?*Eligible Editors*? means, as determined on a given date, all
    Editors from current WGs and all other persons who: (a) were WG Editors at
    any time in the two years before such date; (b) are alive and have provided
    and maintained updated contact information with the OpenID Foundation; and
    (c) elect to participate in selection of the Specifications Council after at
    least seven days? email notice.

    *1.6* ?*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). In the event that a
    Specifications Council member failed to participate in the discussion of two
    consecutive working group proposals, the member will be deemed to have
    resigned, and new specifications council members who are committed to
    participating in the process will be appointed to replace the member.


    *4.2 Review.* The Specifications Council will review each proposal
    within 15 days after receipt and promptly provide notice to
    specs at openid.net 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). 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.

    If no recommendation was issued within 15 days after receipt, the Proposal
    is deemed to be accepted.

    When the Specifications Council rejects the proposal, the Proposers may
    submit the Proposal to a vote of the OIDF membership, in accordance with the
    voting procedures in ?3. When the vote passes, the proposal is deemed to be
    accepted.



    -------------- next part --------------
    An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
    URL: <http://lists.openid.net/pipermail/openid-specs-council/attachments/20100525/388e6c80/attachment-0001.html>
  • Breno de Medeiros at Jun 1, 2010 at 7:56 pm
    If others are in agreement, I would like to join the spec council. I
    have consulted with Joseph Smarr, Dirk Balfanz, and Eric Sachs at
    Google and they have encouraged me to volunteer.
    On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 09:26, Mike Jones wrote:
    At this point, we have affirmative responses from all but Brad and Josh.? I
    propose that we now invite Breno and Nat to join the council to replace Brad
    and Josh.



    I agree that Dirk, Joseph, and John all bring strong qualifications, but to
    my knowledge, none have served as OpenID specification editors, whereas
    Breno and Nat have.



    Are there any objections to now inviting them to join?



    ??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? -- Mike



    From: openid-specs-council-bounces at lists.openid.net
    [mailto:openid-specs-council-bounces at lists.openid.net] On Behalf Of Allen
    Tom
    Sent: Sunday, May 23, 2010 6:05 PM
    To: David Recordon; Mike Jones
    Cc: Johnny Bufu; Brad Fitzpatrick; openid-specs-council at lists.openid.net;
    Josh Hoyt; Dick Hardt

    Subject: Re: [OIDFSC] Refreshing the OpenID specs council



    Yes, I?d like to remain active on the specs council.

    In addition to Breno and Nat, I also think that Dirk Balfanz, Joseph Smarr,
    and John Bradley would also be really good additions.

    Allen


    On 5/23/10 5:49 PM, "David Recordon" wrote:

    Yes, I will remain active.

    On Sun, May 23, 2010 at 2:46 PM, Dick Hardt wrote:

    Yes, I will remain active on the specs council.

    On 2010-05-23, at 1:04 PM, Mike Jones wrote:

    As several OpenID working groups are being proposed, it would be good to
    ensure that the OpenID specifications council is populated with people who
    are currently active in specification development and have the appropriate
    expertise.? Per?this note
    <http://lists.openid.net/pipermail/openid-board/2008-June/002989.html> , the
    council currently consists of these people, who are subscribed to the
    openid-specs-council list with these addresses:
    ? - Allen Tom? atom at?yahoo-inc.com <http://yahoo-inc.com>
    ? - Brad Fitzpatrick? brad at?danga.com <http://danga.com>
    ? - David Recordon? recordond at?gmail.com <http://gmail.com>
    ? - Johnny Bufu? johnny.bufu at?gmail.com <http://gmail.com>
    ? - Josh Hoyt? josh at?janrain.com <http://janrain.com>
    ? - Dick Hardt ?dick.hardt at?gmail.com <http://gmail.com>
    ? - Mike Jones? michael.jones at?microsoft.com <http://microsoft.com>

    Can each of you who plan to remain active on the specifications council
    PLEASE RESPOND affirmatively to this note in the next few days?? Otherwise,
    we should offer the positions to other spec editors who will be active.? Nat
    Sakimura is certainly one person who comes to mind, as editor of the CX and
    Artifact Binding specifications, and also Breno de Medeiros, who is an
    editor for the User Interface Extension.

    To update your subscription to the openid-specs-council list, go
    to?http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-specs-council.

    ??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Thanks,
    ??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? -- Mike

    As a reminder of the role of the specifications council, here are some of
    the relevant passages from the?OpenID Process document
    <http://openid.net/wordpress-content/uploads/2010/01/OpenID_Process_Document_December_2009_Final_Approved.pdf>
    :

    1.4? ?Editor(s)? means, for a particular Specification to be developed by a
    particular WG, the individual Contributor(s) selected to coordinate
    development of, and transcription of the work of the WG for, such
    Specification, as well as (together with any other Editors for that WG) to
    administer WG operation.

    1.5? ?Eligible Editors? means, as determined on a given date, all Editors
    from current WGs and all other persons who: (a)?were WG Editors at any time
    in the two years before such date; (b)?are alive and have provided and
    maintained updated contact information with the OpenID Foundation; and
    (c)?elect to participate in selection of the Specifications Council after at
    least seven days? email notice.

    1.6? ?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). In the event that a
    Specifications Council member failed to participate in the discussion of two
    consecutive working group proposals, the member will be deemed to have
    resigned, and new specifications council members who are committed to
    participating in the process will be appointed to replace the member.


    4.2? Review.? The Specifications Council will review each proposal within 15
    days after receipt and promptly provide notice to?specs at openid.net?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). 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.

    If no recommendation was issued within 15 days after receipt, the Proposal
    is deemed to be accepted.

    When the Specifications Council rejects the proposal, the Proposers may
    submit the Proposal to a vote of the OIDF membership, in accordance with the
    voting procedures in ?3. When the vote passes, the proposal is deemed to be
    accepted.




    --
    --Breno

    +1 (650) 214-1007 desk
    +1 (408) 212-0135 (Grand Central)
    MTV-41-3 : 383-A
    PST (GMT-8) / PDT(GMT-7)
  • Mike Jones at Jun 1, 2010 at 7:57 pm
    +1

    -----Original Message-----
    From: Breno de Medeiros [mailto:breno at google.com]
    Sent: Tuesday, June 01, 2010 12:56 PM
    To: Mike Jones
    Cc: Allen Tom; David Recordon; Johnny Bufu; Brad Fitzpatrick; openid-specs-council at lists.openid.net; Josh Hoyt; Dick Hardt; Nat Sakimura
    Subject: Re: Refreshing the OpenID specs council

    If others are in agreement, I would like to join the spec council. I
    have consulted with Joseph Smarr, Dirk Balfanz, and Eric Sachs at
    Google and they have encouraged me to volunteer.
    On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 09:26, Mike Jones wrote:
    At this point, we have affirmative responses from all but Brad and Josh.? I
    propose that we now invite Breno and Nat to join the council to replace Brad
    and Josh.



    I agree that Dirk, Joseph, and John all bring strong qualifications, but to
    my knowledge, none have served as OpenID specification editors, whereas
    Breno and Nat have.



    Are there any objections to now inviting them to join?



    ??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? -- Mike



    From: openid-specs-council-bounces at lists.openid.net
    [mailto:openid-specs-council-bounces at lists.openid.net] On Behalf Of Allen
    Tom
    Sent: Sunday, May 23, 2010 6:05 PM
    To: David Recordon; Mike Jones
    Cc: Johnny Bufu; Brad Fitzpatrick; openid-specs-council at lists.openid.net;
    Josh Hoyt; Dick Hardt

    Subject: Re: [OIDFSC] Refreshing the OpenID specs council



    Yes, I'd like to remain active on the specs council.

    In addition to Breno and Nat, I also think that Dirk Balfanz, Joseph Smarr,
    and John Bradley would also be really good additions.

    Allen


    On 5/23/10 5:49 PM, "David Recordon" wrote:

    Yes, I will remain active.

    On Sun, May 23, 2010 at 2:46 PM, Dick Hardt wrote:

    Yes, I will remain active on the specs council.

    On 2010-05-23, at 1:04 PM, Mike Jones wrote:

    As several OpenID working groups are being proposed, it would be good to
    ensure that the OpenID specifications council is populated with people who
    are currently active in specification development and have the appropriate
    expertise.? Per?this note
    <http://lists.openid.net/pipermail/openid-board/2008-June/002989.html> , the
    council currently consists of these people, who are subscribed to the
    openid-specs-council list with these addresses:
    ? - Allen Tom? atom at?yahoo-inc.com <http://yahoo-inc.com>
    ? - Brad Fitzpatrick? brad at?danga.com <http://danga.com>
    ? - David Recordon? recordond at?gmail.com <http://gmail.com>
    ? - Johnny Bufu? johnny.bufu at?gmail.com <http://gmail.com>
    ? - Josh Hoyt? josh at?janrain.com <http://janrain.com>
    ? - Dick Hardt ?dick.hardt at?gmail.com <http://gmail.com>
    ? - Mike Jones? michael.jones at?microsoft.com <http://microsoft.com>

    Can each of you who plan to remain active on the specifications council
    PLEASE RESPOND affirmatively to this note in the next few days?? Otherwise,
    we should offer the positions to other spec editors who will be active.? Nat
    Sakimura is certainly one person who comes to mind, as editor of the CX and
    Artifact Binding specifications, and also Breno de Medeiros, who is an
    editor for the User Interface Extension.

    To update your subscription to the openid-specs-council list, go
    to?http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-specs-council.

    ??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Thanks,
    ??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? -- Mike

    As a reminder of the role of the specifications council, here are some of
    the relevant passages from the?OpenID Process document
    <http://openid.net/wordpress-content/uploads/2010/01/OpenID_Process_Document_December_2009_Final_Approved.pdf>
    :

    1.4? "Editor(s)" means, for a particular Specification to be developed by a
    particular WG, the individual Contributor(s) selected to coordinate
    development of, and transcription of the work of the WG for, such
    Specification, as well as (together with any other Editors for that WG) to
    administer WG operation.

    1.5? "Eligible Editors" means, as determined on a given date, all Editors
    from current WGs and all other persons who: (a)?were WG Editors at any time
    in the two years before such date; (b)?are alive and have provided and
    maintained updated contact information with the OpenID Foundation; and
    (c)?elect to participate in selection of the Specifications Council after at
    least seven days' email notice.

    1.6? "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). In the event that a
    Specifications Council member failed to participate in the discussion of two
    consecutive working group proposals, the member will be deemed to have
    resigned, and new specifications council members who are committed to
    participating in the process will be appointed to replace the member.


    4.2? Review.? The Specifications Council will review each proposal within 15
    days after receipt and promptly provide notice to?specs at openid.net?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). 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.

    If no recommendation was issued within 15 days after receipt, the Proposal
    is deemed to be accepted.

    When the Specifications Council rejects the proposal, the Proposers may
    submit the Proposal to a vote of the OIDF membership, in accordance with the
    voting procedures in ?3. When the vote passes, the proposal is deemed to be
    accepted.




    --
    --Breno

    +1 (650) 214-1007 desk
    +1 (408) 212-0135 (Grand Central)
    MTV-41-3 : 383-A
    PST (GMT-8) / PDT(GMT-7)
  • Dick Hardt at Jun 1, 2010 at 8:27 pm
    +1
    On 2010-06-01, at 12:57 PM, Mike Jones wrote:

    +1

    -----Original Message-----
    From: Breno de Medeiros [mailto:breno at google.com]
    Sent: Tuesday, June 01, 2010 12:56 PM
    To: Mike Jones
    Cc: Allen Tom; David Recordon; Johnny Bufu; Brad Fitzpatrick; openid-specs-council at lists.openid.net; Josh Hoyt; Dick Hardt; Nat Sakimura
    Subject: Re: Refreshing the OpenID specs council

    If others are in agreement, I would like to join the spec council. I
    have consulted with Joseph Smarr, Dirk Balfanz, and Eric Sachs at
    Google and they have encouraged me to volunteer.
    On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 09:26, Mike Jones wrote:
    At this point, we have affirmative responses from all but Brad and Josh. I
    propose that we now invite Breno and Nat to join the council to replace Brad
    and Josh.



    I agree that Dirk, Joseph, and John all bring strong qualifications, but to
    my knowledge, none have served as OpenID specification editors, whereas
    Breno and Nat have.



    Are there any objections to now inviting them to join?



    -- Mike



    From: openid-specs-council-bounces at lists.openid.net
    [mailto:openid-specs-council-bounces at lists.openid.net] On Behalf Of Allen
    Tom
    Sent: Sunday, May 23, 2010 6:05 PM
    To: David Recordon; Mike Jones
    Cc: Johnny Bufu; Brad Fitzpatrick; openid-specs-council at lists.openid.net;
    Josh Hoyt; Dick Hardt

    Subject: Re: [OIDFSC] Refreshing the OpenID specs council



    Yes, I'd like to remain active on the specs council.

    In addition to Breno and Nat, I also think that Dirk Balfanz, Joseph Smarr,
    and John Bradley would also be really good additions.

    Allen


    On 5/23/10 5:49 PM, "David Recordon" wrote:

    Yes, I will remain active.

    On Sun, May 23, 2010 at 2:46 PM, Dick Hardt wrote:

    Yes, I will remain active on the specs council.

    On 2010-05-23, at 1:04 PM, Mike Jones wrote:

    As several OpenID working groups are being proposed, it would be good to
    ensure that the OpenID specifications council is populated with people who
    are currently active in specification development and have the appropriate
    expertise. Per this note
    <http://lists.openid.net/pipermail/openid-board/2008-June/002989.html> , the
    council currently consists of these people, who are subscribed to the
    openid-specs-council list with these addresses:
    - Allen Tom atom at yahoo-inc.com <http://yahoo-inc.com>
    - Brad Fitzpatrick brad at danga.com <http://danga.com>
    - David Recordon recordond at gmail.com <http://gmail.com>
    - Johnny Bufu johnny.bufu at gmail.com <http://gmail.com>
    - Josh Hoyt josh at janrain.com <http://janrain.com>
    - Dick Hardt dick.hardt at gmail.com <http://gmail.com>
    - Mike Jones michael.jones at microsoft.com <http://microsoft.com>

    Can each of you who plan to remain active on the specifications council
    PLEASE RESPOND affirmatively to this note in the next few days? Otherwise,
    we should offer the positions to other spec editors who will be active. Nat
    Sakimura is certainly one person who comes to mind, as editor of the CX and
    Artifact Binding specifications, and also Breno de Medeiros, who is an
    editor for the User Interface Extension.

    To update your subscription to the openid-specs-council list, go
    to http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-specs-council.

    Thanks,
    -- Mike

    As a reminder of the role of the specifications council, here are some of
    the relevant passages from the OpenID Process document
    <http://openid.net/wordpress-content/uploads/2010/01/OpenID_Process_Document_December_2009_Final_Approved.pdf>
    :

    1.4 "Editor(s)" means, for a particular Specification to be developed by a
    particular WG, the individual Contributor(s) selected to coordinate
    development of, and transcription of the work of the WG for, such
    Specification, as well as (together with any other Editors for that WG) to
    administer WG operation.

    1.5 "Eligible Editors" means, as determined on a given date, all Editors
    from current WGs and all other persons who: (a) were WG Editors at any time
    in the two years before such date; (b) are alive and have provided and
    maintained updated contact information with the OpenID Foundation; and
    (c) elect to participate in selection of the Specifications Council after at
    least seven days' email notice.

    1.6 "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). In the event that a
    Specifications Council member failed to participate in the discussion of two
    consecutive working group proposals, the member will be deemed to have
    resigned, and new specifications council members who are committed to
    participating in the process will be appointed to replace the member.


    4.2 Review. The Specifications Council will review each proposal within 15
    days after receipt and promptly provide notice to specs at openid.net 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). 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.

    If no recommendation was issued within 15 days after receipt, the Proposal
    is deemed to be accepted.

    When the Specifications Council rejects the proposal, the Proposers may
    submit the Proposal to a vote of the OIDF membership, in accordance with the
    voting procedures in ?3. When the vote passes, the proposal is deemed to be
    accepted.




    --
    --Breno

    +1 (650) 214-1007 desk
    +1 (408) 212-0135 (Grand Central)
    MTV-41-3 : 383-A
    PST (GMT-8) / PDT(GMT-7)
  • Nat Sakimura at Jun 2, 2010 at 4:44 am
    Thanks Breno!

    =nat

    (2010/06/02 4:57), Mike Jones wrote:
    +1

    -----Original Message-----
    From: Breno de Medeiros [mailto:breno at google.com]
    Sent: Tuesday, June 01, 2010 12:56 PM
    To: Mike Jones
    Cc: Allen Tom; David Recordon; Johnny Bufu; Brad Fitzpatrick; openid-specs-council at lists.openid.net; Josh Hoyt; Dick Hardt; Nat Sakimura
    Subject: Re: Refreshing the OpenID specs council

    If others are in agreement, I would like to join the spec council. I
    have consulted with Joseph Smarr, Dirk Balfanz, and Eric Sachs at
    Google and they have encouraged me to volunteer.

    On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 09:26, Mike Joneswrote:
    At this point, we have affirmative responses from all but Brad and Josh. I
    propose that we now invite Breno and Nat to join the council to replace Brad
    and Josh.



    I agree that Dirk, Joseph, and John all bring strong qualifications, but to
    my knowledge, none have served as OpenID specification editors, whereas
    Breno and Nat have.



    Are there any objections to now inviting them to join?



    -- Mike



    From: openid-specs-council-bounces at lists.openid.net
    [mailto:openid-specs-council-bounces at lists.openid.net] On Behalf Of Allen
    Tom
    Sent: Sunday, May 23, 2010 6:05 PM
    To: David Recordon; Mike Jones
    Cc: Johnny Bufu; Brad Fitzpatrick; openid-specs-council at lists.openid.net;
    Josh Hoyt; Dick Hardt

    Subject: Re: [OIDFSC] Refreshing the OpenID specs council



    Yes, I'd like to remain active on the specs council.

    In addition to Breno and Nat, I also think that Dirk Balfanz, Joseph Smarr,
    and John Bradley would also be really good additions.

    Allen


    On 5/23/10 5:49 PM, "David Recordon"wrote:

    Yes, I will remain active.

    On Sun, May 23, 2010 at 2:46 PM, Dick Hardtwrote:

    Yes, I will remain active on the specs council.

    On 2010-05-23, at 1:04 PM, Mike Jones wrote:

    As several OpenID working groups are being proposed, it would be good to
    ensure that the OpenID specifications council is populated with people who
    are currently active in specification development and have the appropriate
    expertise. Per this note
    <http://lists.openid.net/pipermail/openid-board/2008-June/002989.html> , the
    council currently consists of these people, who are subscribed to the
    openid-specs-council list with these addresses:
    - Allen Tom atom at yahoo-inc.com<http://yahoo-inc.com>
    - Brad Fitzpatrick brad at danga.com<http://danga.com>
    - David Recordon recordond at gmail.com<http://gmail.com>
    - Johnny Bufu johnny.bufu at gmail.com<http://gmail.com>
    - Josh Hoyt josh at janrain.com<http://janrain.com>
    - Dick Hardt dick.hardt at gmail.com<http://gmail.com>
    - Mike Jones michael.jones at microsoft.com<http://microsoft.com>

    Can each of you who plan to remain active on the specifications council
    PLEASE RESPOND affirmatively to this note in the next few days? Otherwise,
    we should offer the positions to other spec editors who will be active. Nat
    Sakimura is certainly one person who comes to mind, as editor of the CX and
    Artifact Binding specifications, and also Breno de Medeiros, who is an
    editor for the User Interface Extension.

    To update your subscription to the openid-specs-council list, go
    to http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-specs-council.

    Thanks,
    -- Mike

    As a reminder of the role of the specifications council, here are some of
    the relevant passages from the OpenID Process document
    <http://openid.net/wordpress-content/uploads/2010/01/OpenID_Process_Document_December_2009_Final_Approved.pdf>
    :

    1.4 "Editor(s)" means, for a particular Specification to be developed by a
    particular WG, the individual Contributor(s) selected to coordinate
    development of, and transcription of the work of the WG for, such
    Specification, as well as (together with any other Editors for that WG) to
    administer WG operation.

    1.5 "Eligible Editors" means, as determined on a given date, all Editors
    from current WGs and all other persons who: (a) were WG Editors at any time
    in the two years before such date; (b) are alive and have provided and
    maintained updated contact information with the OpenID Foundation; and
    (c) elect to participate in selection of the Specifications Council after at
    least seven days' email notice.

    1.6 "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). In the event that a
    Specifications Council member failed to participate in the discussion of two
    consecutive working group proposals, the member will be deemed to have
    resigned, and new specifications council members who are committed to
    participating in the process will be appointed to replace the member.


    4.2 Review. The Specifications Council will review each proposal within 15
    days after receipt and promptly provide notice to specs at openid.net 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). 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.

    If no recommendation was issued within 15 days after receipt, the Proposal
    is deemed to be accepted.

    When the Specifications Council rejects the proposal, the Proposers may
    submit the Proposal to a vote of the OIDF membership, in accordance with the
    voting procedures in ?3. When the vote passes, the proposal is deemed to be
    accepted.




    --
    Nat Sakimura (n-sakimura at nri.co.jp)
    Nomura Research Institute, Ltd.
    Tel:+81-3-6274-1412 Fax:+81-3-6274-1547

    ????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
    PLEASE READ:
    The information contained in this e-mail is confidential and intended for the named recipient(s) only.
    If you are not an intended recipient of this e-mail, you are hereby notified that any review, dissemination, distribution or duplication of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete your copy from your system.
  • Allen Tom at Jun 1, 2010 at 9:18 pm
    +1

    Allen


    On 6/1/10 12:56 PM, "Breno de Medeiros" wrote:

    If others are in agreement, I would like to join the spec council. I
    have consulted with Joseph Smarr, Dirk Balfanz, and Eric Sachs at
    Google and they have encouraged me to volunteer.
    On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 09:26, Mike Jones wrote:
    At this point, we have affirmative responses from all but Brad and Josh.? I
    propose that we now invite Breno and Nat to join the council to replace Brad
    and Josh.



    I agree that Dirk, Joseph, and John all bring strong qualifications, but to
    my knowledge, none have served as OpenID specification editors, whereas
    Breno and Nat have.



    Are there any objections to now inviting them to join?



    ??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? -- Mike



    From: openid-specs-council-bounces at lists.openid.net
    [mailto:openid-specs-council-bounces at lists.openid.net] On Behalf Of Allen
    Tom
    Sent: Sunday, May 23, 2010 6:05 PM
    To: David Recordon; Mike Jones
    Cc: Johnny Bufu; Brad Fitzpatrick; openid-specs-council at lists.openid.net;
    Josh Hoyt; Dick Hardt

    Subject: Re: [OIDFSC] Refreshing the OpenID specs council



    Yes, I?d like to remain active on the specs council.

    In addition to Breno and Nat, I also think that Dirk Balfanz, Joseph Smarr,
    and John Bradley would also be really good additions.

    Allen


    On 5/23/10 5:49 PM, "David Recordon" wrote:

    Yes, I will remain active.

    On Sun, May 23, 2010 at 2:46 PM, Dick Hardt wrote:

    Yes, I will remain active on the specs council.

    On 2010-05-23, at 1:04 PM, Mike Jones wrote:

    As several OpenID working groups are being proposed, it would be good to
    ensure that the OpenID specifications council is populated with people who
    are currently active in specification development and have the appropriate
    expertise.? Per?this note
    <http://lists.openid.net/pipermail/openid-board/2008-June/002989.html> , the
    council currently consists of these people, who are subscribed to the
    openid-specs-council list with these addresses:
    ? - Allen Tom? atom at?yahoo-inc.com <http://yahoo-inc.com>
    ? - Brad Fitzpatrick? brad at?danga.com <http://danga.com>
    ? - David Recordon? recordond at?gmail.com <http://gmail.com>
    ? - Johnny Bufu? johnny.bufu at?gmail.com <http://gmail.com>
    ? - Josh Hoyt? josh at?janrain.com <http://janrain.com>
    ? - Dick Hardt ?dick.hardt at?gmail.com <http://gmail.com>
    ? - Mike Jones? michael.jones at?microsoft.com <http://microsoft.com>

    Can each of you who plan to remain active on the specifications council
    PLEASE RESPOND affirmatively to this note in the next few days?? Otherwise,
    we should offer the positions to other spec editors who will be active.? Nat
    Sakimura is certainly one person who comes to mind, as editor of the CX and
    Artifact Binding specifications, and also Breno de Medeiros, who is an
    editor for the User Interface Extension.

    To update your subscription to the openid-specs-council list, go
    to?http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-specs-council.

    ??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Thanks,
    ??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? -- Mike

    As a reminder of the role of the specifications council, here are some of
    the relevant passages from the?OpenID Process document
    <http://openid.net/wordpress-content/uploads/2010/01/OpenID_Process_Document_
    December_2009_Final_Approved.pdf>
    :

    1.4? ?Editor(s)? means, for a particular Specification to be developed by a
    particular WG, the individual Contributor(s) selected to coordinate
    development of, and transcription of the work of the WG for, such
    Specification, as well as (together with any other Editors for that WG) to
    administer WG operation.

    1.5? ?Eligible Editors? means, as determined on a given date, all Editors
    from current WGs and all other persons who: (a)?were WG Editors at any time
    in the two years before such date; (b)?are alive and have provided and
    maintained updated contact information with the OpenID Foundation; and
    (c)?elect to participate in selection of the Specifications Council after at
    least seven days? email notice.

    1.6? ?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). In the event that a
    Specifications Council member failed to participate in the discussion of two
    consecutive working group proposals, the member will be deemed to have
    resigned, and new specifications council members who are committed to
    participating in the process will be appointed to replace the member.


    4.2? Review.? The Specifications Council will review each proposal within 15
    days after receipt and promptly provide notice to?specs at openid.net?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). 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.

    If no recommendation was issued within 15 days after receipt, the Proposal
    is deemed to be accepted.

    When the Specifications Council rejects the proposal, the Proposers may
    submit the Proposal to a vote of the OIDF membership, in accordance with the
    voting procedures in ?3. When the vote passes, the proposal is deemed to be
    accepted.


  • Johnny Bufu at Jun 2, 2010 at 5:08 am
    +1

    Thanks and welcome Breno!

    Johnny
    On Tue, Jun 01, 2010 at 02:18:48PM -0700, Allen Tom wrote:
    +1

    Allen


    On 6/1/10 12:56 PM, "Breno de Medeiros" wrote:

    If others are in agreement, I would like to join the spec council. I
    have consulted with Joseph Smarr, Dirk Balfanz, and Eric Sachs at
    Google and they have encouraged me to volunteer.
    On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 09:26, Mike Jones wrote:
    At this point, we have affirmative responses from all but Brad and Josh.? I
    propose that we now invite Breno and Nat to join the council to replace Brad
    and Josh.



    I agree that Dirk, Joseph, and John all bring strong qualifications, but to
    my knowledge, none have served as OpenID specification editors, whereas
    Breno and Nat have.



    Are there any objections to now inviting them to join?



    ??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? -- Mike



    From: openid-specs-council-bounces at lists.openid.net
    [mailto:openid-specs-council-bounces at lists.openid.net] On Behalf Of Allen
    Tom
    Sent: Sunday, May 23, 2010 6:05 PM
    To: David Recordon; Mike Jones
    Cc: Johnny Bufu; Brad Fitzpatrick; openid-specs-council at lists.openid.net;
    Josh Hoyt; Dick Hardt

    Subject: Re: [OIDFSC] Refreshing the OpenID specs council



    Yes, I?d like to remain active on the specs council.

    In addition to Breno and Nat, I also think that Dirk Balfanz, Joseph Smarr,
    and John Bradley would also be really good additions.

    Allen


    On 5/23/10 5:49 PM, "David Recordon" wrote:

    Yes, I will remain active.

    On Sun, May 23, 2010 at 2:46 PM, Dick Hardt wrote:

    Yes, I will remain active on the specs council.

    On 2010-05-23, at 1:04 PM, Mike Jones wrote:

    As several OpenID working groups are being proposed, it would be good to
    ensure that the OpenID specifications council is populated with people who
    are currently active in specification development and have the appropriate
    expertise.? Per?this note
    <http://lists.openid.net/pipermail/openid-board/2008-June/002989.html> , the
    council currently consists of these people, who are subscribed to the
    openid-specs-council list with these addresses:
    ? - Allen Tom? atom at?yahoo-inc.com <http://yahoo-inc.com>
    ? - Brad Fitzpatrick? brad at?danga.com <http://danga.com>
    ? - David Recordon? recordond at?gmail.com <http://gmail.com>
    ? - Johnny Bufu? johnny.bufu at?gmail.com <http://gmail.com>
    ? - Josh Hoyt? josh at?janrain.com <http://janrain.com>
    ? - Dick Hardt ?dick.hardt at?gmail.com <http://gmail.com>
    ? - Mike Jones? michael.jones at?microsoft.com <http://microsoft.com>

    Can each of you who plan to remain active on the specifications council
    PLEASE RESPOND affirmatively to this note in the next few days?? Otherwise,
    we should offer the positions to other spec editors who will be active.? Nat
    Sakimura is certainly one person who comes to mind, as editor of the CX and
    Artifact Binding specifications, and also Breno de Medeiros, who is an
    editor for the User Interface Extension.

    To update your subscription to the openid-specs-council list, go
    to?http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-specs-council.

    ??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Thanks,
    ??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? -- Mike

    As a reminder of the role of the specifications council, here are some of
    the relevant passages from the?OpenID Process document
    <http://openid.net/wordpress-content/uploads/2010/01/OpenID_Process_Document_
    December_2009_Final_Approved.pdf>
    :

    1.4? ?Editor(s)? means, for a particular Specification to be developed by a
    particular WG, the individual Contributor(s) selected to coordinate
    development of, and transcription of the work of the WG for, such
    Specification, as well as (together with any other Editors for that WG) to
    administer WG operation.

    1.5? ?Eligible Editors? means, as determined on a given date, all Editors
    from current WGs and all other persons who: (a)?were WG Editors at any time
    in the two years before such date; (b)?are alive and have provided and
    maintained updated contact information with the OpenID Foundation; and
    (c)?elect to participate in selection of the Specifications Council after at
    least seven days? email notice.

    1.6? ?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). In the event that a
    Specifications Council member failed to participate in the discussion of two
    consecutive working group proposals, the member will be deemed to have
    resigned, and new specifications council members who are committed to
    participating in the process will be appointed to replace the member.


    4.2? Review.? The Specifications Council will review each proposal within 15
    days after receipt and promptly provide notice to?specs at openid.net?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). 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.

    If no recommendation was issued within 15 days after receipt, the Proposal
    is deemed to be accepted.

    When the Specifications Council rejects the proposal, the Proposers may
    submit the Proposal to a vote of the OIDF membership, in accordance with the
    voting procedures in ?3. When the vote passes, the proposal is deemed to be
    accepted.


  • Johnny Bufu at May 25, 2010 at 7:11 am
    I'm still around and would like to remain active on the specs-council.

    Johnny
    On Sun, May 23, 2010 at 08:04:55PM +0000, Mike Jones wrote:
    As several OpenID working groups are being proposed, it would be good to ensure that the OpenID specifications council is populated with people who are currently active in specification development and have the appropriate expertise. Per this note<http://lists.openid.net/pipermail/openid-board/2008-June/002989.html>, the council currently consists of these people, who are subscribed to the openid-specs-council list with these addresses:
    - Allen Tom atom at yahoo-inc.com
    - Brad Fitzpatrick brad at danga.com
    - David Recordon recordond at gmail.com
    - Johnny Bufu johnny.bufu at gmail.com
    - Josh Hoyt josh at janrain.com
    - Dick Hardt dick.hardt at gmail.com
    - Mike Jones michael.jones at microsoft.com

    Can each of you who plan to remain active on the specifications council PLEASE RESPOND affirmatively to this note in the next few days? Otherwise, we should offer the positions to other spec editors who will be active. Nat Sakimura is certainly one person who comes to mind, as editor of the CX and Artifact Binding specifications, and also Breno de Medeiros, who is an editor for the User Interface Extension.

    To update your subscription to the openid-specs-council list, go to http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-specs-council.

    Thanks,
    -- Mike

    As a reminder of the role of the specifications council, here are some of the relevant passages from the OpenID Process document<http://openid.net/wordpress-content/uploads/2010/01/OpenID_Process_Document_December_2009_Final_Approved.pdf>:


    1.4 "Editor(s)" means, for a particular Specification to be developed by a particular WG, the individual Contributor(s) selected to coordinate development of, and transcription of the work of the WG for, such Specification, as well as (together with any other Editors for that WG) to administer WG operation.

    1.5 "Eligible Editors" means, as determined on a given date, all Editors from current WGs and all other persons who: (a) were WG Editors at any time in the two years before such date; (b) are alive and have provided and maintained updated contact information with the OpenID Foundation; and (c) elect to participate in selection of the Specifications Council after at least seven days' email notice.

    1.6 "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). In the event that a Specifications Council member failed to participate in the discussion of two consecutive working group proposals, the member will be deemed t
    o have resigned, and new specifications council members who are committed to participating in the process will be appointed to replace the member.


    4.2 Review. The Specifications Council will review each proposal within 15 days after receipt and promptly provide notice to specs at openid.net<mailto:specs at openid.net> 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). 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.

    If no recommendation was issued within 15 days after receipt, the Proposal is deemed to be accepted.

    When the Specifications Council rejects the proposal, the Proposers may submit the Proposal to a vote of the OIDF membership, in accordance with the voting procedures in ?3. When the vote passes, the proposal is deemed to be accepted.

Related Discussions

Discussion Navigation
viewthread | post
Discussion Overview
groupopenid-specs-council @
categoriesopenid
postedMay 23, '10 at 8:04p
activeJun 2, '10 at 5:08a
posts20
users10
websiteopenid.net
irc#openid

People

Translate

site design / logo © 2021 Grokbase