Does the IETF provide the right model for us?
Steven Greenberg
unnecessary. I have no opinion about whether this is true or not (and
don't want to turn this into a conversation about OWF).
Anyway, his rationale was that the IETF already has a well thought out
set of policies and procedures to handle all of these organizational
issues. That made me wonder whether their model could work for us as
well.
I am embarrassed to admit that I don't know how they work. Before I
dive into their docs, I wanted to check whether any of you had an
opinion. Do you know anything about how the IETF works and whether
their model would work for us?
Anyway, his article is here: http://tinyurl.com/5zzq6y.
Steve
Phil Wolff
IETF has a reputation for intricacy, bureaucracy, quagmires, and delay. That may be stale or incorrect, but it may explain why there's a perceived need for an alternative.
OWF doesn't seem to be about making standards so much as helping people bring specifications to market that have a chance of survival. More of a hands-on incubator and a marketplace where volunteers and projects can find each other.
Proof is in the pudding. (ClicheOfTheDay™)
- Phil
Phil Wolff
managing editor, Skype Journal
http://SkypeJournal.com
pwo...@skypejournal.com
skype:evanwolf
+1-510-455-4384 SkypeIn
+1-510-444-8234 San Francisco
+1-646-461-6123 New York
+44 020 8816 8780 London
+852 8175 8107 Hong Kong
http://www.linkedin.com/in/philwolff
http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=724232370
http://twitter.com/evanwolf
http://wiki.dataportability.org
Steven Greenberg
> IETF has a reputation for intricacy, bureaucracy, quagmires, and delay. That
> may be stale or incorrect, but it may explain why there's a perceived need
> for an alternative.
>
> OWF doesn't seem to be about making standards so much as helping people
> bring specifications to market that have a chance of survival. More of a
> hands-on incubator and a marketplace where volunteers and projects can find
> each other.
You end up with intricacy, bureaucracy, and delay because the
participants think that the outcome matters. People care, so they try
to get their way when they disagree. You end up with bureaucracy
because people feel like the process isn't fair if you don't have a
formalized way for the group to make a decision.
The more decentralized the group, the longer each decision takes. The
larger the group, the longer it takes. The more that the participants
think the outcome matters, the longer it takes. The more powerful the
players, the longer it takes.
OWF is brand new and small. They don't have any legacy projects to
drag along and haven't gotten down to details yet. Right now, they're
still largely undefined and are talking about motherhood and apple pie
issues. They haven't started the great slog through the details.
Don't get me wrong, I wish them well and hope that they're successful.
I think that they're doing a Good Thing. I've seen this movie
before, though. Every group starts out saying that they're going to
be different... and then they're not.
Steve