I don't think that it does anyone – let alone adoption – good for us to be arguing about this on mailing lists. We very clearly have different approaches to similar problems, but I think that we want the same thing in the end though possibly on different timelines. I'm supportive of overlapping work groups as a way to encourage innovation and look forward to seeing any of the v.Next work groups produce technology.
--David On Fri, Jun 4, 2010 at 7:57 PM, Dick Hardt <[email protected]> wrote: > On 2010-06-04, at 7:49 PM, David Recordon wrote: > > Given that it's Friday at 8pm, I'll do my best to answer Dick's questions. > Dick's assertion that the proposed Connect work group charter, "is vague, > wide ranging and heavily overlaps other working groups" certainly applies to > the v.Next proposals as well. > > > I had asked clarifying questions the day you posted the charter. > > The v.Next WGs were decided upon at the OpenID Summit and existed prior to > any public disclosure of Connect. > > > The first sentence of the charter clearly states that the work group will > be, "complementing other active OpenID Foundation Working Groups." If the > Discovery work group becomes active and produces useful technology, it would > certainly be adopted! > > > please add that in then > > To date no one in the OpenID Foundation has done technical work on > discovery since OpenID 2.0 was finalized. It's thus reasonable for it to be > in scope and later abandoned if all works out. If it is removed from the > scope and the Discovery work group doesn't produce a working proposal, this > work group 1) couldn't discuss discovery and 2) would have to be fully > rechartered in order to work on discovery. > > > why not do the discovery work in the discovery WG? ... why duplicate the > effort? you are part of the community, so you can participate in the > discovery WG and promote the discovery work you want done. Makes no sense to > do the same thing in two places. > > > The goal of the charter is to help frame the problem the working group is > going to solve; not answer all of the questions about how it will happen > before the work group is even created. > > > Not sure what that means. Your charter is vague. Please review my questions > I inserted and tighten up your charter. I am not asking how the work will be > done, I am asking for the charter to be clear and appropriately scoped. > > -- Dick > >
_______________________________________________ specs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-specs
