The Virtual Quill

more IDtbd

When I posted about the IDtbd group meeting last week (see YAUG - Yet Another Umbrella Group) I worried that perhaps I was the only one not seeing the benefit of this proposed organization. Now OpenID's David Recordon has posted his notes on the meeting which - looking at those parts of the meeting I attended - appear to very accurately reflect what was said. And it would appear that those present who are not members of the Liberty Alliance remained quite skeptical of the new group. The objections, as David notes, are fairly generally accepted:

Autonomous projects
Less funding
Board has too much authority
Plan for introducing a new organization should be more incremental

He also notes that Sun's (and Liberty Alliance secretary) Bill Smith raised a strong objection to what I'd written and was "...Asking for all future meetings to be private with no public notes so that people can speak more frankly. " Sadly, that's what I've come to expect from the Liberty Alliance - let's not discuss our differences, let's simply stifle them. That organization was born in darkness from a small group of invited participants which brooked no intrusions or comments from the outside and which reserved the chairs on its oard of Directors to only those first invited organizations for a very long time.

What's really fascinating is that IDtbd claims to want "To promote harmonization" but evidently needs to stifle dissent in order to do so!

Labels: DIDW, liberty alliance, umbrella

Posted 11:06 AM (0) comments

YAUG - Yet Another Umbrella Group

This morning at DIDW I sat in on a session called "Identity Community Initiatives Working Together On A New Future" which was an organizational meeting for a new "umbrella" group called IDtbd (TBD - To Be Determined - cute, eh?). What I heard, though, led me to call this group SOLA: Son of Liberty Alliance. It's not just that the moving forces behind the group are from Liberty but also the proposed structure seems to derive from Liberty.

While the avowed messages of the group are, perhaps, laudable:

VISION: To promote harmonization, interoperability, and adoption of privacy-respecting, secure, identity-based access to digital services.

MISSION: To help member organizations leverage a common set of resources, operational frameworks, and best practices using open specifications to enable trustworthy environments for networked interactions.

the reality is one more layer of bureaucracy on top of already top-heavy structures. As just one example, someone wishing to create an OpenID project would, I'd think, join the OpenID Foundation. The OpenID Foundation is a constituent member of Identity Commons. IDTBD proposes that both Identity Commons and the OpenID Foundation become members of it. But the person creating the project could also become a member. Of course, that (to me) means the project never gets developed because the developer is spending too much time on hierarchical organization meetings as well as too much money seeking to be heard by those organizations.

The only positive thing I heard this morning, the only thing I can wholeheartedly support, was Bill Smith's statement that he wouldn't hesitate to call on the Liberty Alliance to dissolve in favor of this new organization. Well, I can agree with part of that. There are too many organizations and dissolving the Liberty Alliance (without creating a descendant) would be "...a consummation Devoutly to be wished."

Labels: identity commons, liberty alliance, umbrella