(resending with a correct address for Johnny) From: Mike Jones Sent: Thursday, April 24, 2008 5:42 PM To: Josh Hoyt; Johnny Bufu; David Recordon Cc: Dick Hardt; [email protected] Subject: Creating the OpenID specifications council
Hi Josh, Johnny, and David, The OpenID Foundation process for creating specifications calls for a Specifications Council to review proposed working groups. At least one working group is about to be proposed and so we need to create the specifications council. The process document (at http://openid.net/ipr/) states about creation of the specifications council: 1.8 "Specifications Council" means a group comprised of: (a) two representatives selected by the Board; and (b) five representatives selected by the Eligible Editors. The Board may select from among the current Board members (or other appropriate persons, as determined by the Board), and the Eligible Editors may select from among themselves (or other appropriate persons, as the Eligible Editors determine). 2 Specifications Council. The initial Specifications Council, as of the date these Processes are adopted, will be comprised of two persons selected by the Board and five persons selected by the then-current OpenID Authentication 2.0 Specification Editors. The members of the Specifications Council will serve for two year terms (although one of the initial members selected by the Board and two of the initial members selected by the Editors of the OpenID Authentication 2.0 Specification will serve for only a one year term - as selected by consensus of the Specifications Council - so that Specifications Council membership terms may be staggered). There are no "term limits" for Specifications Council membership, and the Board or Eligible Editors, as applicable, may re-select the same persons to serve for more than one term (consecutive or otherwise). Today the board chose Dick Hardt and myself as the board's two representatives. As the "then-current OpenID Authentication 2.0 Specification Editors" I'm writing to ask you to select five additional persons who you believe would be appropriate experts to review and provide feedback on proposed OpenID working groups. Three of those persons may be yourselves if you so choose. Can you please discuss this matter among yourselves and then report back to the board soon on your choices for the specifications council members? This is occurring now because I am about to propose the creation of a working group to complete the PAPE specification. Once the proposal is submitted, the specifications council's job is: 4.2 Review. The Specifications Council will review each proposal within 15 days after receipt and promptly provide notice to [EMAIL PROTECTED]<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> of its recommendation to either accept or reject it, together with a brief statement of the rationale for its recommendation (including any findings or opinions by the Specifications Council regarding the criteria for rejection in the following clauses (a)-(d). The decision to accept or reject the proposal will then promptly be submitted to a vote of the OIDF membership, in accordance with the voting procedures in §3. If a proposal is rejected, it may be modified and resubmitted. The reasons for rejection will be limited to: (a) an incomplete Proposal (i.e., failure to comply with §4.1); (b) a determination that the proposal contravenes the OpenID community's purpose; (c) a determination that the proposed WG does not have sufficient support to succeed or to deliver proposed deliverables within projected completion dates; or (d) a determination that the proposal is likely to cause legal liability for the OIDF or others. Thanks a lot! -- Mike
_______________________________________________ board mailing list [email protected] http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/board
