I think I know philosophically the meaning of the term 'canonical email address' but I would like to know if it has an alternative or more exacting meaning technically speaking.
thanks, -bill ----- Original Message ---- From: Mike Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> Cc: "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, March 13, 2008 10:39:42 AM Subject: Re: [OpenID board] Topic for this week's agenda Bill, maybe you can report on our status with respect to have canonical e-mail addresses for all of our members on the board call. I agree that this is an avenue worth exploring, at least for votes pertaining to working groups. Thanks, -- Mike -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Drummond Reed Sent: Thursday, March 13, 2008 9:27 AM To: [email protected] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [OpenID board] Topic for this week's agenda +1. Note that if each voter had one canonical email address associated with their OpenID of record, email voting would meet these requirements for the time being. =Drummond > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf > Of Nat Sakimura > Sent: Thursday, March 13, 2008 1:04 AM > To: [email protected] > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [OpenID board] Topic for this week's agenda > > So, what is the requirement to the voting app? > > I guess, > > 1) OpenID Enabled. > 2) One OpenID is allowed to vote only once. > > are the minimum requirement. Perhaps: > > 3) One can change the vote before the deadline. > > is nice, too, but I am not sure if we really need it. > > I do not think annonymous voting is needed for the time being. > > =nat > > Mike Jones wrote: > > That's true, but those votes wouldn't qualify under the IPR policy and > procedures for any of the significant decisions, such as starting a > working group, approving drafts, etc. They're also not good enough for > electing board members. > > > > What are you proposing that these votes would be good enough for? > > > > -- Mike > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of David Recordon > > Sent: Wednesday, March 12, 2008 1:21 PM > > To: [email protected] > > Subject: Re: [OpenID board] Topic for this week's agenda > > > > The community can always just have a lightweight version of voting. > > Someone makes a proposal, others +1 it, boom done. > > > > On Mar 10, 2008, at 11:41 AM, Martin Atkins wrote: > > > > > >> Drummond Reed wrote: > >> > >>> Scott and Bill: > >>> > >>> Per the thread below, the question of when we will be opening up > >>> new Working > >>> Groups for specifications is starting to come up. I'm not saying > >>> there is a > >>> compelling reason to do that yet for any spec other than PAPE (and > >>> the > >>> Trusted Exchange spec that Nat Sakimura and his team have > >>> suggested), but I > >>> do think that OIDF needs to take a public stance about: > >>> > >>> a) The status of current WGs (to my knowledge it's not published > >>> anywhere > >>> what WGs exist or are planned) > >>> > >>> b) The process for community members to form a WG. > >>> > >>> Can we put a short discussion about this on this week's agenda? > >>> > >>> > >> It was my understanding that the blocker for this is that we have no > >> voting system through which we can hold a vote for the creation of a > >> WG. > >> > >> Obviously that is in hand per our discussions at the last meeting. > >> However, I guess we could discuss an interim plan to get the first few > >> WGs up and running quickly. It'd be nice if these could be up and > >> running by IIW so that the WGs can potentially present to the > >> community > >> what they've been up to. > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> board mailing list > >> [email protected] > >> http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/board > >> > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > board mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/board > > _______________________________________________ > > board mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/board > > > > -- > Nat Sakimura (=nat) > Nomura Research Institute, Ltd. > XDI.ORG Vice Chair > > _______________________________________________ > board mailing list > [email protected] > http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/board _______________________________________________ board mailing list [email protected] http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/board _______________________________________________ board mailing list [email protected] http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/board
_______________________________________________ board mailing list [email protected] http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/board
