W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xg-webid@w3.org > April 2011

RE: PROPOSAL: Weekly Meetings & Organization.

From: peter williams <home_pw@msn.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2011 11:34:18 -0700
Message-ID: <SNT143-ds8CF8918671A80CE5CF10C92960@phx.gbl>
CC: "'WebID XG'" <public-xg-webid@w3.org>

On the phone call, we framed the purpose of paragraph 3 and 4 as:


On para 3: Make it clear that webid wants https to mature further in its
role,  becoming more than the authentication of transport-endpoints to each
other. There are therefore certain UI suggestions for browser - on how the
client authn cert/profile-ref can move the issue forward. With browser
changes, https can address session state on multiple sites, including the
login/logout cycle, for multiple tabs.


On para 4: webid addresses the classical delegation of identity issue,
wherein one resource server can speak for the user when consuming web sites
and services delivered by others. This is a refinement of the OAUTH flow in
some sense, and seeks to advance OAUTH in enabling a user to add a statement
to the user’s friends relation in the foaf card to express “webid-related
consent” – much as today an OAUTH authorizer site manages users consent
enabling servers to access profile-related web services at the user’s IDP.


However the text is formulated, these are the points we are trying to make.
We are using the classical keywords: login/logout and consent. We relate
these to the debating issue: should TLS move beyond secure channels into
state/session management for REST, and how do user consent and cryptographic
delegation mechanisms cooperate in such as the printing use case.


We came to the conclusion that the information assurance argument could be
reduce to 1 statement that webid expects to closely work with other
infrastructure upgrades, that are works in progress: IPv6 and DNSsec,
particularly those that are aim to add assurance to self-signed certs (e.g.
DANE’s counter-signatures on self-signed server certs, based on DNSsec RRs).



From: public-xg-webid-request@w3.org [mailto:public-xg-webid-request@w3.org]
On Behalf Of Henry Story
Sent: Monday, April 25, 2011 7:28 AM
To: Stéphane Corlosquet
Cc: WebID XG
Subject: Re: PROPOSAL: Weekly Meetings & Organization.



On 25 Apr 2011, at 15:52, Stéphane Corlosquet wrote:

Apologies for reacting so late... I thought I could make it to the new time,
but every week I have to cancel and send my regrets. Could we alternate the
times (and day too if ppl want) of the calls? We could have a call on Monday
16:00 UTC on odd weeks, and a call at a different time/day on even weeks.
Personally I care more for the time of the day than the day of the week.


I've started a poll which includes each day of the week (ignore the actual
dates) to see if there are more than just myself willing have a call



I am of course fine with any hour.


It does indeed seem like we have had less people on the conf call since the
hour change even though we have been very busy recently. 


It might have been that our having  more meetings (every week instead of
biweekly) has had an effect as well as the holiday season,... 






On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 1:14 PM, Nathan <nathan@webr3.org> wrote:

Hi All,

I'd like to propose that we have weekly meetings every Monday at 16:00 UTC
from April 11th onwards.

If anybody has any objections or is otherwise engaged every Monday at this
time, then please do say before Friday the 8th April.

Meeting Time/Location:
 Mondays, Weekly, from April 11th 2011
 Time: 1600 UTC
 W3C Zakim bridge, telecon code: WEBID (93243)
    SIP: zakim@voip.w3.org
    Phone US: +1.617.761.6200 <tel:%2B1.617.761.6200> 
    Phone UK: +44.203.318.0479 <tel:%2B44.203.318.0479> 
    Phone FR: + <tel:%2B33.> 
 Duration: 60 minutes

 - We'll generate a (random) scribe list and match them up to related dates,
for an example see: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/Scribes
 - If for any reason you can't scribe (ever) then do say so we can remove
you from the rotation.
 - If for any reason you won't be able to attend a meeting which you are due
to be scribing, please let us know via the mailing list so an alternative
can be arranged.
 - To save any unwanted surprises, I'll scribe the first weekly meeting on
the 11th.

Generic Meeting Agenda:
1. Accept minutes from previous meeting
2a. Action Item Review
2b. Issue Closing
    (more below)
3. Anything else we need to discuss in the telecon?
   (a time to raise any important news, updates etc)
4. A List of 1-4 predetermined ISSUEs or Topics, tbd weekly by the Chair in

 - I'd like us to try and get working through the open/raised issues:
.. and advance the products:
.. so that we all feel that the time we commit to the meetings is well
spent, and typically is centred towards making progress on the issues and
products, pre discuss on the list, then come to final resolutions on the

Quorum and resolving issues:
 - to close an issue, Quorum is usually 1/3 of the active members in a group
(in our case that would be 12). However I'd suggest that we specify 6
plus-ones to move an issue to preliminarily close an issue, at which point
the ISSUE will be moved to a "Pending Review" status.
 - For any issue we propose to close, the resolution must be sent to the
mailing list and left on "Pending Review" for one week so that others get a
chance to comment on any proposed solution, or raise any last minute
 - After one week of "Pending Review", all issues requiring no further
discussion will be closed at the subsequent meeting, and any issues
requiring further telecon time / another vote will be placed on the Agenda
by the Chair.

Does that all sound okay?





Social Web Architect

Received on Monday, 25 April 2011 18:34:45 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:39:44 UTC