Calls for Consensus following TPAC

Hi FedID WG members,

Thanks for your participation in TPAC meetings for the FedID CG and WG. 
We had good discussions despite the logistical challenges of a major 
power outage and construction noise! Minutes are now posted to GitHub:

<https://github.com/fedidcg/meetings/blob/main/2024/2024-09-23-TPAC-notes.md> 
Day 1

<https://github.com/fedidcg/meetings/blob/main/2024/2024-09-24-TPAC-notes.md> Day 
2

Please let us know (ideally via pull requests) of any additions or 
corrections.


On day 1, we discussed the CG-WG process and several feature demos. On 
day 2 (compressed), we reviewed proposals in Stage 1 to assess their 
status and progress. Several proposals had consensus in the room to 
advance to Stage 2. This means their proposers will now work on pull 
requests to develop spec text.


Chairs committed to sending these items to the list to confirm the 
in-room consensus to move to Stage 2:

* Active Mode (Issue 442)
* Continuation API (Issue 555)
* Account Labels API (Issue 553)
* Multiple configURLs API (Issue 552)
* Multi-IdP API (Issue 319): 
* SAA Autogrant  (Issue 467)

(see links and issue descriptions from 
<https://github.com/w3c-fedid/FedCM/wiki/Status-of-FPWD%E2%80%90identified-Issues> 
)

This is a consensus call. If you object to the advancement of any of the 
above proposals to Stage 2 in the CG-WG process, please let the chairs 
know. Otherwise, their advancement will be confirmed in one week.


In addition,

* Lightweight FedCM is preparing to move to Stage 2

* Login Status held an extended discussion that continued beyond the end 
of the working session. Johann wrote up a GitHub issue to see if there 
are agreed next steps.
  <https://github.com/w3c-fedid/login-status/issues/8> If you’re 
involved or interested, please weigh in on that issue.


Procedural call for consensus: At the TPAC meeting, we made only 
provisional decisions and followed with this call for consensus. We 
think it would be productive for the group to allow chairs and editors 
to make real-time consensus calls on pull requests and proposals.
Accordingly, we’re asking for WG consensus that group decisions on PR 
merges and proposal advancement may be made without a follow-up call to 
the list. (Advancement in the W3C Process to Candidate Recommendation 
would still require asynchronous response time as per our charter.) 
Decisions must always be documented and open to the presentation of new 
information.

Please let us know within a week whether you have any objection to this 
decision process on PRs and proposal advancement.


Thanks!

–Wendy for the FedID WG chairs
-- 
Wendy Seltzer -- wendy@seltzer.org +1 617.863.0613
https://wendy.seltzer.org/
Principal Identity Architect, Tucows

Received on Tuesday, 1 October 2024 21:14:10 UTC