9-10am PDT | noon-1pm EDT | 16:00-17:00 UTC | 5-6pm UK | 6-7pm CET (time chart)
US toll number: +1-218-862-7200
Attendee code: 987632 (do not follow with "#" symbol as it may cause the code not to be recognized)
Attendees
Adams, Trent
Akram Ibne, Hasan
Bryan, Paul
Fletcher, George
Hadley, Marc
Henderson, Iain
Hoellrigl, Thorsten
Lopez, Diego
Machulak, Maciej
Maler, Eve
Nagelberg, Alan
Scholz, Christian
Smith, Bill
Regrets
None sent explicitly.
Agenda
Introductions
Kantara procedures review
Leadership balloting
Future meeting schedule
Minutes
Introductions, first half: people
Eve is serving as convener (interim chair).
Roll call and quorum determination
13 of 26 voting members: quorum not reached.
Review agenda
Kantara procedures review
We strive for consensus if possible, and voting procedures by Robert's Rules of Order if not.
This is a Work Group, not a Discussion Group, so we can do technical specs.
The IPR policy is approximately the "three R's": royalty-free, reasonable terms, reciprocity.
If you're concerned you can't live up to the policy at any time, there are procedures for disclosure and IPR review milestones.
Leadership team balloting
Nominally we have to fill chair, vice-chair, and one or more editor roles.
We're required to do a secret ballot, for which we'll use the email method.
Some people nominated themselves for these roles on the call:
Eve for Chair
Bill for Vice-Chair (available after September)
Paul for Vice-Chair in the absence of others willing and able to serve
Paul for Technical Spec Editor
Hasan for Use Cases Editor
We will continue to gather nominations (send to Eve or staff@kantarainitiative.org) until 5pm Pacific time on Aug 12; please ensure nominees are willing to serve first.
AI: Eve to send nomination instructions to the UMA list today for the Chair, Vice-Chair, Tech Editor, and Use Cases Editor, and ask Kantara staff to follow up.
AI: All to send nominations to Eve or staff@kantarainitiative.org by 5pm Pacific time on Aug 12.
Introductions, second half: technical proposition and working style
The charter has important design principles that should guide our decisions.
Other reading that may be useful: the UDVPI flower (propeller) diagram and requirements matrix, the Privacy Constraints spec, and the OpenID CX use cases document.
AI: Iain to send links to UDVPI sources.
AI: Eve to send links to other sources mentioned.
Proposed working style: "agile specification".
Scenarios should be nontechnical and get at the real need, "user-story"-style, and use cases can add high-level technical topologies and assumptions.
Each will have a status of pending vs. accepted vs. deferred vs. rejected, depending on whether, where, and when it fits into our goals and principles.
We will strive for simultaneous use-case and spec work to hasten implementation.
We'll try to wrap up scenario- and use-case-collecting activities within six months, to guide our V1 spec work.
We agreed to be cautious in accepting new requirements that invalidate old ones because of the potential impact to spec design and any implementations.
We should start with "master" use cases that illustrate the core design principles and illuminate the hardest basic issues.
There is a strawman scenarios/use cases document available with some candidate "master" material.
People should be able to contribute directly to the document in Confluence, if they wish, with the one true "owner" (Editor) of the document ensuring the additions meet our editorial expectations and doing other writing and maintenance.
AI: Eve to find out about CMS branching in Confluence.
AI: Eve to revise the Scenarios and Use Cases document further and send out a link to the group.
Should we be working on user experiences as well as protocols?
We would like to be as specific as possible about potential UX in scenario and use-case writeups.
This helps them guide our design and implementation work, without being constrained.
"It's a lot easier to play chess on a board than in your head."
Perhaps we won't even accept scenarios and use cases without this being provided, in graphics or in text.
Perhaps we can partner with other groups to do user testing of these UX's.
Future meeting schedule
We agreed to consider this same hour for a weekly time slot.
We agreed to consider a 1.5-hour call.
AI: Eve to propose that we keep this time for a regular weekly meeting, and send out an agenda for meeting #2.
AI: Eve to ask who can attend the tentative UMA F2F meeting on Sep 15 in Las Vegas.