Re: ISSUE:[UC-2-05: MarketPlace]

[Evan Prodromou <evan@outlook.net>]

>>>>> "OD" == Orchard, David <dorchard@jamcracker.com> writes:

    ZA> Can we clarify the status of issues that have not currently
    ZA> been voted? Issue 5-04 had a voting result of 7-4, I believe.

So, first off, schedule-wise, we're submitting straw man 4 today for
inclusion in the draft SAML documents for the F2F next week. This will
quite probably be the last formal output of our subcommittee. There
really isn't time to do another vote before the F2F, unfortunately,
which is why we had such a large number of issues to cover on this
last ballot.

Second, I don't think there are any issues on the issue list that have
not yet been put to a ballot. If there are, well, dommage: someone
should have picked them up and championed them. We've been doing this
voting process for several months, and we've run 3 rounds of
balloting. I just can't believe that there's something on the issue
list that's vitally important to one of the members of this
subcommittee that hasn't been voted on.

Lastly, issues that have been voted and had no conclusion (no
resolution was chosen with the 75% margin) are marked "Voted, No
Resolution," and the voting results are posted in the Issues List. We
decided after the first round of voting that these could be re-stated
and re-sent to the subcommittee by concerned champions. That's what
happened with issue group 3, for example.

I believe Darren is going to be presenting the list of
voted-but-unresolved issues at the F2F.

    OD> I agree very much with Zahid's questioning on the voting
    OD> results.  Some of the session issues had an even higher
    OD> percentage of votes, at 8-3 but 73% didn't meet the 75%.  It
    OD> seems strange that we just drop the issue if it makes meager
    OD> 73% of the votes.

It seems strange, but it is the number we all agreed to. If you
recall, the question was how we could use voting to show consensus --
a strong super-majority seemed like the best way to do there. 75% was
a compromise value, btw -- some people wanted 85-90%.

Sessions are a special case -- we've actually balloted that issue
group twice. Can we really say we've just "dropped" those issues?

~ESP