Re: [scim] Proposal to create a design team

[Igor Faynberg <[e-mail]>]

I tend to stick to Eliot- the-Stick-in-the-Mud's principle on that 
issue, but my questions are from the other end of spectrum.

   The precedence is such as that a design team can be created either 1) 
outside of a working group (as was the case of  the SIN design team 12 
years ago) or  2) as part of a working group (what with SIP WG design 
teams).

  I take it that the proposal is for the case 2, but so far we seem to 
have a fairly small group, vis-a-vis that gigantic SIP WG, whose sheer 
size necessitated parallelism. And hence question is why a separate 
subset group is needed at all.  Of course,  people may have specific 
interests, and nothing prevents them from forming a special interest 
group, writing drafts and getting them through the WG process.

In short, what privileges will the official /design team /have in the 
process vs. a typical de-facto design team?

Igor

On 10/18/2012 11:32 AM, Eliot Lear wrote:
> Leif, Morteza,
>
> I'm sorry to be a stick in the mud, but I don't understand the 
> objective of this design team.  Let's start with an easy question:
>
>     * What work are they supposed to do?  What issues are they
>       supposed to address?
>
> Put another way, I was not of the understanding that what is posted is 
> a strawman, but based on running code.  If there is running code, it 
> seems to me that the onus is on those in the WG to state issues.  
> There are a number, as I understand it.  A design team is necessary 
> when something needs to be designed.  What here needs to be designed
>
> Now to answer my question in part, there is this dangling reference to 
> ServiceProviderConfigs.  Is that needed or should it be removed?
>
> I guess what I'm asking for is just a bit more scope, please.
>
> Eliot
>
>
> On 10/11/12 11:31 AM, Leif Johansson wrote:
>> On 10/11/2012 09:02 AM, Hannes Tschofenig wrote:
>> > Hi chairs,
>>
>> > Are we talking about this document:
>> > http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-scim-api/
>>
>> > Looks like a strawman proposal to me already right now.
>>
>> We are talking about a strawman for the next major revision of
>> that document and the schema document.
>>
>> It is great to see so many are willing to participate. Please
>> note that participation in a design-team requires active
>> participation and time comittment.
>>
>>     Best R
>>     Leif
>>
> >
> _______________________________________________
>
> > scim mailing list
>
> > [e-mail]
>
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/scim
>
> >
>
> >
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> scim mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/scim