[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: RE: ISSUE:[UC-2-05: MarketPlace]
Evan, I want to make it clear that I am not suggesting any change to the Strawman 4 draft. The entire voting process has been carried out carefully and systematically. I do appreciate that. I am just pointing out that there was a surprise (for me) in the voting results reported on Monday in regards to the disposition of ISSUE:[UC-2-05]. - prateek >>-----Original Message----- >>From: Evan Prodromou [mailto:evan@outlook.net] >>Sent: Tuesday, April 10, 2001 3:38 PM >>To: UseCaseList >>Subject: Re: ISSUE:[UC-2-05: MarketPlace] >> >> >>>>>>> "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 >> >>------------------------------------------------------------------ >>To unsubscribe from this elist send a message with the single word >>"unsubscribe" in the body to: >>security-use-request@lists.oasis-open.org >>
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC