[Applause]
[Music]
one second yeah the basic I hear the
whole session is okay
the different ways that we make a
standard variable is there different
bits of the puzzle different approaches
to doing it what are we doing in each
place how does it work what do we like
about each approach and learn because
each place has different constraints
different factors that influence what
you actually can do in that environment
so we I'm Charles actually it paid by
Pegasus to all intents of people so it
for the enterprise of the airline's
my job is making sure the standard stuff
they works
dan Burnett I've been doing web and
Internet standards for about twenty
years
I got a dozen specs to my name they're
currently working on decentralized
identifiers at w3c some of you may have
heard of that may not know my problem I
am in the yeah I'm in the Pegasus
standards group with Charles Foundation
hi my name is Joey person to area might
come to you only on JavaScript the
standards in the language and I also
work with a number of different open
source and standard notably the one I'm
going to talk to you today about shared
one minute I'm Nick Johnson leads the
Nexus
yeah yeah so you know we I'm the one who
put this bowl little stuff up on this
slide so it's interesting if you asked
someone what a standard is there are
very very very very different
definitions depending on which group
you're talking to and what they want to
accomplish and arranges all the way from
someone saying well basically the two of
us agreed we wrote this down
we have a standard okay all the way to
our way you know one of the most extreme
is sort of if you look at ISO you know
you have five years of discussion
through a whole bunch of working dogs
committees drives international
standards and eventually you have boats
from member you know member country
standards organizations to publish and
so there's there's really you know
basically virtually no process to kind
of extreme process and so we didn't
really want to start with a a definition
more than just to say that there are
disagreements about what it means to be
a standard and so now as we talk through
different activities different
approaches different factors that you
can use to distinguish among different
standards organizations and processes
you can see what the variety is and we
can discuss you know as a group what are
what are the aspects that we would like
for the etherium community aware
[Music]
so basically we set this up in pieces a
couple of us would work with two or
three heads on different places over
there presents some basic things that we
do in different organizations hopefully
what briefly just enough to understand
what actually happens and then it's
about discussion about what what do we
all want to do right how do we want this
work so today we'll be kind of looking
at each of these organizations through
the lens of a few different factors that
help you think about the differences
between these organizations so as Dan
was saying earlier if you think about
the definition of standard just simply
being for our sake here in this
classroom today agreement how did we
reach it there are a few different ways
we can look at reaching that goal
reaching microbrew : agreement and we'll
talk about the w3c EEA the EIP process
these the methods they use the factors
save you
to reach that but and the thing we want
you to really take with you is that that
process that standards / agreement
making a process is one that we all
known as as a community of technologists
so if you don't like the process you can
participate in changing your process and
that should also be part of your
consideration
so these are some of the factors that
you'll want to bear in mind and that
we'll talk about and the first is
governance that's often a bit of a
buzzword I think this is simply to
simplify it we are talking about
policies that support decision making
could be a process for how we decide
that a decision needs to be paid it can
be a process for the decision itself it
could be other policies that support who
gets to make that decision it doesn't
and I had one thing that yeah this is it
governance mean and for standards
organizations comes down to what happens
when there's a disagreement who decides
right that that's ultimately and there
may be different levels you know that
you go through but in every organization
if you want to know in the end how it
works you look at the end of the chain
and see who is the final arbiter who
makes the decision is it Tim berners-lee
in the the web world is it is it
mythology okay I think anyway
so and I'm not arguing that either one
of those is actually correct I'm just
saying you know it's good to know where
the final decision lies and that's
largely what we
talk about governance although it ends
up getting expressed in a variety of
formal 7:01 informal ways so the next
factor we want you to bear in mind is an
IPR which is a acronym for intellectual
property rights and that may be
important to you it may not be but in
the world of formal standards setting it
ends up being extremely important and
it's one of the key differentiators
between a lot of the standards bodies
that you are familiar with like the
debaters and they're different because
they have different approaches to this
topic which is quite less so they have a
lot of legal support a lot of staff who
focused on policy segments setting here
and understanding how different
specifications
how the copyright over the patents are
are granted I really do which is we put
this out in the public domain and anyone
can use it is not a patent policy it's a
disaster waiting to happen oh
yeah doesn't do the comment I was gonna
make not known as that every standards
organization starts with no rules and
there and no process and actually want
it that way if you look at my ETF when
it started they were very loose and
gradually they had to get more
restrictive and you'll notice if you go
to any IETF meeting that internet
engineering task force meeting they put
up a no well slide at the beginning of
every working group every call every
everything and they say if you know do
not understand the contents of this
slide do not speak do not give an
opinion in any way shape or form okay
that's not an accident they got to that
point because they because there were
lawsuits that eventually forced them
together that w3c hated the process
based on the I 80th and one day through
C was formed things were fairly loose
and open and guess what a company came
in and they actually argued for
specification being developed a certain
way and then once the specification was
done and all the implementations were
out they sued all the implementers
because they have admin on a core piece
of technology that they pushed into this
back ok so you know what I hate to say
it every every or go students
look we don't want to deal with that
stuff until I read get sued and then
you're like oh shoot we got to do it too
so we're going to talk about thing to
note about this is these assurances
these policies assist a specification or
standard and being accessible to certain
levels of business and governments right
so they are very very concerned with
making sure that the provenance of the
IP is secure and that's what this that's
why this ends up in an open source where
you're just sort of rapidly anime
but once I was businesses start to rely
on actually I probably should
okay loco again but we had a
conversation a diversity of learning
foundation security movement that RN and
he said that actually is number one
problem that he has with donated code
for projects implements foundation is
the provenance of the code they because
when people start projects they don't
track it at all but when it gets donated
he's the one has to go and actually
check every essentially every commit
going back into history to find out
where it came from and what intellectual
property restrictions there might be on
it he says it's just an absolute
disaster and nightmare for him today so
he's working on I'm trying to come up
with a better way in exam so I know
we're spending a lot of time on that
it's because nobody likes to talk about
it but I think it's good for people in
this room to understand where it comes
from you know and why we end up having
to deal with it what's the right level
process in the journey like you said
with over three sit as a function always
all these things know know what they
know now would they upon day one added
all those processes in yeah yeah but
I've a single one of them so you aren't
even be for today in this community
beverage had all these perceptions on
census me you should have the minimum an
anniversary as possible to not get
caught out like do stuff because we
don't like marching in lines it's about
we want to make sure that the problem
does not come
because we stopped it before it's done
so you should have fairly lightweight
thing as we go through the different
organizations we'll look at what they do
and that's you now III see patent
process which on any with any major sort
of it many many times
is actually not very painful at all very
lightweight if you're doing the right
thing completely trivial when something
bad happens and turns up with a patent
there is a mechanism for dealing with it
that is about as painless as you can get
dealing with patents which is life
that's not sticking red-hot pokers into
you there's a little bit but I also have
explanatory it will be obviously a
disgusting idea in that review process
really by that these organizations some
review period by the public by a broader
membership by an outside
is or by a group of people concerned
about for example accessibility or
internationalisation for security and a
lot of times these organizations will
require other kinds of review so that
[Music]
and the last factor that you'll want to
consider is which other people or
organizations or industry partners to
participating in that group because that
will make a difference on whether it
makes sense to bring your
standardization project to that area and
you'll want to look for places where
there's overlap or their companies you
might want to work with
so I can people just probably go right
into our different standards activities
and as pertains to
[Music]
so asus is fairly new this they are new
to bacteria not very long ago the
research team along with consensus and
yeah I purchased about starting this and
this open project and you can check out
but the purpose was really to try and
start building what we thought might be
a gap to help support standards making
where the idea might be that the group
wants to produce a normal standard is
something that would eventually be able
to go up through to a national standards
body or an international standards body
like the ISO and
and check out our abstract there on the
repository but we want to basically
provide some guidance and some support
for folks who want to produce standards
in that way
Oasis itself has been doing this for a
really long time
they started actually in the nineties
sgml the standardized generally standard
generalized markup language a long time
ago and related XML standard spectrum
everything now a lot of their
standardization activities focus on
security and privacy it's a pretty large
organization there are thousands of
people who have contributed to these
standards and there's several hundred
standards that they produced this is a
canvas or shop so if they're typically
industry members who come with projects
that want to work with other folks in
the industry to produce Oasis standard
and move along the national standards
track up to again the national
international bodies like I so arrays
not very long ago at all actually back
in March we announced and open projects
programs so if you can think about it in
a traditional standards development
there's probably a number of different
[Music]
stereotypical sort of thoughts you might
have about that but they aren't really
known for doing the open source work
Oasis has been supporting open source
projects that assist its technical
committees for some time and we wanted
to open up a program for open source
projects that want to benefit from a
standards track possibility so which is
a growing number of open source projects
the program helps provide technical
governance and Fiscal agency so have
you're part of a service project you
want to be able to spend money
we provide the intellectual property
rights the development support so you
need legal supporters we need community
management
and to it it's not a membership
organization and this program is not a
member or it operates on the sponsorship
do so companies can come in and she was
to sponsor projects like etherion as SME
and the American Foundation have done
and that cost is on a sliding scale and
I think a lot of times in our
communities we're very concerned about
where the money comes from and that kind
of thing so just being transparent here
but anybody can participate in the other
projects
cerium open project there's technical
activities to do so however and again
this gets back to that provenance
concern you care about and IPR they must
sign a CLA that includes a patent on the
cert when you met
stick anything in there and go sue
everybody
looking at the those factors this group
is as open it's free there's no cost to
participate if you're a member of the
community and we want to contribute to
that committee of writing a
specification because it brings you joy
and happiness and please you can do that
and if you are a company or an
organization that wants to to support it
in some way and wants to help drive a
longer-term direction for example
sponsor and participate from the project
governing board IPR it's is royalty-free
and our projects have to use one of
several other image open-source licenses
members to be scared about
now Jeju and MIT it works like that it
works Tyler for the group is very
similar to how you work in an open
source the capacity to move out of
activity on github mailing lists
teleconference calls as needed effective
things the decision-making standpoint
the steering groups operate on consensus
but again for the formal piece of it
a standard through a standard strike it
has to be
bringing rise the project is able to
develop and improve their own specs that
you can stop there
but choose to make a project or make a
specification a normal standard with
oasis that means it has to go through
choices approval process which provides
member and public review periods so the
work areas that we're looking to get
started on started with our JSON RPC
so if you who want to get involved with
this I really encourage me to become you
know file an issue of the repository
where come chat with me
because these are really good strapping
right now we don't have it's like a
green field in space
we'll give you this wives
and then you would be interested in so
there's also roughly it's like this is a
piece of work you want to do so we have
in our 70s technical steering committee
to say we have steering the defeat of
the development or but that's the group
that does them yeah it's not a planning
they actually the world just like a
working room in IETF or nbc/universal
I'm sure yeah
he had posted three Milan's basically we
trying to what we're trying to do is
extend the theorem architecture the
thing I love about a theorem piece is
based on stems and so we happen to take
things that that Enterprise by which I
mean both giant fat cat million dollar
companies and organizations like your
local government run garbage collection
service health service if you live in a
civilized country any kind of
organization who wants to build stuff
wants to go out of the etherium but once
permission networks wants private
transactions and so on you could do
these things by yourself and build by
yourself the point of a EA is if we have
an agreed way of doing it we have half a
dozen different clients different bits
of software you can use you're not tied
to VIN if your developer decides to go
off to Mars or retire to the mountains
and get another developer because this
is all standard stuff people not in the
same way that if your developer decides
to go to mountains there are other
people who know salinity we controls EA
like Oasis has
liaison things and a little we're just a
liaison we participate in DC 307 which
is my sirs group working on
international standards for blockchain
very much about ISO except we don't want
to go there it it's a place where people
spend a long time working on things like
the glossary what is a blockchain
is it different from distributive in
technology is any subset superset
overlapping said after 18 months of
discussion or something we as a liaison
participate in this discussion but then
it goes to a vote by country
representatives so it's literally how
many people watch your vision but let's
talk about 12 points and that is how the
decisions are formally made and so one
of the reasons for the discussion is to
try and get a point where we all agree
and it's not going to be a contentious
vote because we not in paralyzed those
situations what happens is some country
with a pile of money goes to a bunch
trees with money at all and says you
will pay huge event you and you and you
to be members of this group will pay for
your representative together meeting so
if you vote with us on some crazy
student ID that that's when I say that
is wrong that doesn't normally happen
thankfully a little very slow process
it's very very good moment yeah not so
much
so the governance is American solution
you pay to play we provide a staff who
assists of about five or six people how
often basically do marketing and talking
for members my job is make sure the
standard process actually works
that's like that I spent twenty years
doing this stuff have an idea about how
these processes can be is an agreement
that members sign and so we can hold
them to seventh day by specifically of
course yeah if you remember then
everything you do goes with a grant of
patent license anything that you put on
the promise that anybody can license
their for free you can't come back and
said are we change our mind we decided
we want to charge you for a patent not
do like you signed it away leave you
leave already a copyright story is
frankly bit down
if you take aspects you can read up
publicly into this dress
specs but we've taken the license is one
of the base have a long to iscandar
let's copy this ugly thing with it why
is that dumb because if you're on a
development team trying to implement it
well you'll probably do is take the
space jumper into pieces hostas pieces
around your dance with some common
trainer technically that's a derivative
work technically that is something you
have to ask us for permission to do
absolutely yes unless you're going to
publish like da version like one a yes
we did shot just usable and that's the
discussion we have within the board
there's important directors who have
performed good well now work style like
most people stuff is gonna give out
requests where where we can we were
quite lazy consensus which is so I'll
puts up an idea looks like it makes
sense we agree that's great but we do
have a formal decision-making process
and we have a weekly meeting
teleconference the agenda for that
meeting is published days in advance so
ever I can see it and you can always say
that kind of the meeting that don't do
this and that is enough to stop a
decision from being made the first time
if you just keep saying don't do this
without justifying it we will put it up
for a discussion at the meeting and
eventually if you've got nothing except
we're deciding to do this we discuss it
and agree
so some stuff actually gets discussed at
teleconferences most of the work is
gonna be this the encounter agreement
that it just works the the review
process is essentially continuous we
published our specs on a 6 month
schedule like at DEFCON we will publish
be release and the theme of this new
release is whatever may be that we
finished but it's how we get to DEFCON
so through years just like a open source
project literally whatever got through
the yeah this is good enough to put in
goes down in the nascent ship and and
one thing is DEA is paid at what it's
like to join our be it's basically
organizations the starting price is
three grand a year if you're a library
or government or a research organization
or a small company the top price is
something like 25 all right
want to do that and right now and you
have Reaper is restricted to members can
actually see what's in there we have
heard the feedback that we're not sure
what's going on and we don't like being
that underscore we would like more
visibility and so we are going back to
take that feedback and say well how do
we provide more visibility the concern
that people have is right now we know
who is bringing content in we know who
is influencing the direction because
their members they paid their money we
know who can really get that frequently
they sign the agreement if we open up
they get a Reaper can we still keep that
control to make sure that people are
driving IPR stuff that's bad that's an
open discussion inside EA why there's no
feeling is I suspect we can go seeing
other people do it but right now that's
the situation and yeah involved you can
you can follow this is a compliant spec
and we have the trust of computers both
chained framework we change clients path
update this and we will have some more
space coming out soon at NTP monster-dog
you can actually find release documents
but these are edits a specialist
assistant live off github
whatever we have changed that week they
continue you become a member
[Music]
the VIP system is which are based on the
VIP which itself is based on the IP
system which is basically lengthy
changes because VIPs were originally
designed to apply for every language
they're all the slightly different
nature to what we try to standardize in
here in community and this kind of a
dichotomy inside VIPs as well because
there are two main types of things
people try to standardize what is more
or less contracted devices and how that
application last evidence and the other
is changes so there's a lot of of the
Lakeman in how these processes operate
but the end result of one is a standard
that basically anybody could volunteer
to write the contract adhere to the
identity enter or it's a standard for an
RPC interface to another world of
devices like that and the other is
something that provides a team
so they start off similarly they have a
similar discussion processes and so on
but while one basically just requires
that only technically sound and that
people come to general agreement what
you obtain the other is a much more sort
of all persons movement of gathering
consensus for a hot war so we have those
two signal paths and there make some
changes as results to how vips local
theater VIPs or counties and we'll try
to adapt some of the items and building
consensus and building usable standards
so yeah this is a job as we see it is
mostly provided almost exclusively to
providing the toriel services so we have
you been coming human wastes we make
sure that the little doesn't break you
make sure that it has a reputation for
the makes may succeed so that's
something reading it can understand what
you're trying to write and we try to see
the standard for when you drop very low
again kind of following the IE to give
us approached his way anyway needs some
draft and then we we try and help the
field
you know standing through we're not
trying to be the averages of what makes
a good standard me ever trying to make
their that could see this as a community
driven process so we try and avoid doing
technical decision making part the same
process as mr. since its dramatic some
things so in fact it's the government's
against it try to be trying to look like
anyone people to spank anyone to break
draftee with faculty draft and company
although our some of these other
processes here for like the way this is
appointed how is the young person's
itself behind yeah
so at the moment most of you do like
yeah so this kind of functions about how
do you make changes to be a key one
because what you do is to EOP one that
answer as near as na and you say things
believes it's full request and maybe
wait six months for people like you over
there's the right to like an assassin so
forth so that's something we need to
establish Peter the main issue is
anyhow the chance to ap1 view this is a
channeling comfortable lisa sizing their
judgment both changes to a neutrally ids
or questions about them so long at least
comfortable about to the amantha changes
the entire process understandably
and because we have because what Mary
this is about time
there they were rocking like other
things they might be out responsibility
not to get into the scenes of some idea
distance to end anita strangest and so
this is defending area area which the
precious is currently weakest actually
where the consensus it's rough consensus
I'll talk more about that magnitude
every to be seen because their what they
mean by consensus is
yes and your computer village of
describing liable to say
so IPR and atlases please don't hurt me
all all the yuppies have to be released
you know oh I see zero that we don't
currently have a peasant assignment
process and partly issue recently and
there's nobody I peas incorporated with
no organization that can sign a contract
with you know giving up that rights so
that child do my letter make knowledge
here at least is that without a body
having an encouragement that's
enforceable there's no party elegance
that consignment and then continue the
cause of you tried a certain test so I'm
going to be out
insight into their nature
whoops all everything's I'm not going to
have vital wastes and so on and right
when to writing a draft juices will
assign you a number which is generally
the number of the next poll request it
gets moved it as a draft after that we
have a lot of his job is basically to
allow you to make changes to a draft or
to allow you to accept changes other
people who want to make you a draft
discussion takes place on a basically a
forum nominated by the author of the
draft and if you want to progress your
draft class that are after they isn't
into a statement we have us lightish
wait process by which the draft author
can nominate it because a final call
they have to provide a certain amount of
time I think that during that time
people can provide technical feedback
and be in the last all the authors and
speak to provide a summary of all
teachings were raised and how they
address them and then we'll be users
look at the best summary and decide
whether they think
this changes if you want to dissipate
next slide please please open the PIR if
you draft I've been at the air if you
want to a meeting the process and then
we can argue about and how we see our
approaches of infant processes and
likewise if you go to the comedy there's
a talk to us being way too small
volunteer help be aware but it is you
get very little eggle eight or a ten and
a lot of stretch work
comical second please come join us
[Music]
documentation and other other leg yeah
so so partly because we believe in its
making the person's identity centralized
and happy because we have not volunteer
their hours and we try to make this
assumption community jokes that the
community's job as possible and that's
final
thanks is supposed to sort of help
resolve but really the governor's that
doesn't get accepted as final and Mason
is than they described it is necessary
station as they you know it's a standard
where somebody could read us they're
moving something compatible but without
having to import discussions with the
author it's awesome and ultimately it's
the it was his job to make sure it
doesn't get through and missile eats
that but we try and make that as
lightweight as possible buying by
exploiting this is is there any of my
kids
and I write the IP for some crazy idea
ahead that my university will affect
both obedient to the end of this process
justice not really no I've said before
that you know we try not to decide we
like your standards a good idea reading
whether it is irrelevant we might have
been including to Bolivia so if you want
to it's so so you know there's no
officially required place that you have
to like heaven you have to have a
discussions URL there has to be possible
pretty matters there we don't have a
requirement but it must be able to place
the three petitions very popular place
to do that but we're together again of
people who we have to be inside 20 time
long term I we really love to see more
like magicians greatness which only
covers working groups I would love to
see them take up the reigns for sure
they know standards
I again sort of borrowing them or from a
native if you want to write a statement
that does because it would be nice if
the others say that's great
please go talk to the magician's
wouldn't be written for you and if you
want to do it on your own you should
have good reason why you're at that time
today that's about going to order to be
experienced some other areas in which
there are some other areas in which even
through VIP process panic what I think I
think the most important thing is that
these approaches around modifications to
the process because if we don't have
that box down there
you know we have a quest but I would
like to see more lights to make it more
systematic so please it's based on how
much time and a teacher they do this I
had available to spend on and on ways to
make it
procedural terms of making sure the
people of the sample make statements and
analysis I do you think if there is a
shoe can you hear that there I'm saying
if there were more incentivization
layers and the yaki process for editors
or people kind of adding to the the
whole program you think it'd be more
engaging and more efficient if it's it's
difficult to say I think was the
psychological page where if I ask you to
pass me a glass of water you do if I add
also you five speeds to perhaps maybe
that's what you're insulting to just say
no and I think so I think you need to be
very careful about you know but if you a
gold star every time you agree to an
important placed or something because I
don't think that's why most EIP and
there's a small tear but also we do it
as well
you know I think with rather than like
two rates incentivisation that basic
thing might be if someone might be able
to just say we have a budget to hire a
full-time out yourself you know that is
their job now you know and if they don't
enjoy it it will sorry two jobs
sometimes you don't check sure your job
you know that might be a better way to
make sure things moved ancestor think
it's also the case that if you if you
provide incentive to people that you
said we're gonna pay you for putting
stuff into a spec and say hey I give
free money for making work for other
people who does this benefit the answers
of the people you make work for my be
ecosystem where that work certainly
becomes a big distraction
I'd be the person who's actually taken
by the money to do stuff that's
essentially useless a bit before you end
up with a reverse effect where I'm in
suits by suggesting safety reform
equates now they know how bad I was like
a day by basketball right that's right
is let's say the working group fills the
stack and does the development side of
it
last night hey I'm not against incentive
schemes except that I don't actually
know of one that is well have to work
basically
so only last question I have on this and
we should move on so we can get other
survey get some when there are
disagreements did you talk about a time
when there are maybe controversial
subjects and how those how those have
been getting resolved so some degree
they simply to reform the ie purses so
they're really the big ones that come to
mind there are things like risky VIPs I
think it was nine nine eight you know
which proposed to rescue some parents
and so on
at the time we beliefs flavor about the
Roma beauticians and so on so the scenes
that like if any of this or approved
this is a draft they look giving the
same political justice a that this is
how we should govern you know this
location doing the next time for itself
so when things are being on traditions
because there's a perception of the IP
it is to exercising controller
validating operates or over water should
be accepted and our response has been to
try and separate those concerns to say
that we're trying to write standards
we're not trying to tell you that you
shouldn't prevent standards or forced
people to practice standards and so
that's people main source of controversy
assembly this cases where people have
strong disagreements over busy medical
teams or something so you try to
finalize this and they say oh they did
what it is this is a bad standard and
ultimately I think you there's no easy
solution to that you just have to build
a process where generally technical
concerns addressed in a typical manner
rather than the personal manner and if
somebody is sediment and standing the
ground then you have to have people who
can
you can I could write all the div today
but since ads on block number X my
accounts it's ten thousand beneath them
and I believe there's that should be
standardized aboard but I also believe
that all things should immediately
summarily rejected you know can you just
fantastic question dinner let fall these
bodies do you do you guys publish all
your processes in a way that anyone can
actually read them and fight their way
through survey everyone is with us yeah
thanks basically to find the EAS process
we have a full process we don't use much
formally there's a procedure for things
really get bad we can have a fight on
stuff that's damned hard to find if you
have access to you know repos if you
remember and we have documents about a
basic working style and we have get the
tenders out he can obtain to stuff
president everybody else's stuff is to
public you could read that as press
discus in the case VIPs what
tell me privately I need how
standardized exam as I say it doesn't
describe how is itself should be
notified and the reason is have received
wisdom that just doesn't make it into
the eiv you know the convention of this
is how you do those things
it's very stuffy in it is no right there
yeah that's that's actually why I was
asked to because I was trying I was
actually filing a change for Epione some
time ago they found it kind of hard to
actually from ERP one get to an oval
process view on what am I expected to
deliver and what has what stages do I
have to wait for others to actually
provide comments on it or do I even have
to go pop on a codex call and show it
there as well and even though it's just
a change to you people and why is it in
the cloud and calm because of its kind
of very confusing I ended up trading my
own process diagram for it so so I can
just follow it and go through because
you should put that actually I actually
sent this over to you people
PDF already wrestle I can also edit this
so this person started six months ago
maybe and all of these record everyone
and said okay to image and still has any
major event whether the change about
adding security
so that generally good change is another
big it's like something that it just
used today
yeah very simple change in you yeah and
also that those charts that is like the
word was present that idea and was
interesting idea Michelle they don't
want to talk about so I would give you
one thing a very simple change that
requires spike there are 1000 users if
you want a thousand we have these to
change a name special I do want to vary
in the details but you if we go back for
example for where he comes from protocol
bit for Bitcoin that stuff um from
heaven that has security considerations
did clintus got rid of it for some
reason
yeah because it it didn't make it into
ELP because it was amended so that's
actually just fixing what would what we
lost on the web now I swear he said that
you
runs into that hole where the
modifications really one itself are
described and I as an individual you
deserve also don't feel comfortable
urging something at least I know the
other users rotator that may feel the
same and we we need to be like we need
to actually which I I think I got a
session stuff in in some of the company
of jeans been for security
considerations and privacy
considerations and they've since been
removed so yeah this is a it's a bigger
discussion security considerations are
always addressed it's just not proactive
it happens at the end of the lifecycle
of the IP or whatever it is that's why
majority of beginning you can drag all
this information along basic things that
I even like us all it does we could jump
in there without reviewing your earpiece
or whatever is in there but like the
main people that I want to believe
four-year please those of us in many
stages unclear for me like in what state
is might be able you know it used to be
in liberal mode for some months because
I was actually waiting for someone else
to do which was kind of unexpected for
me because like a final request
I had discussions on the magician's
forum there was only like positive
feedback for that it was only like
formal changing something that is really
however we want to have it in there and
I just didn't know like how to push
forward at some point what is the
forcing function to to make it keep
going okay so
w3c that's the World Wide Web Consortium
it's the group that defined HTML and
related specifications okay so you all
know what that is
so governance they're basically two I'm
there there are more than two kinds of
groups but the two main ones that most
people care about our community groups
and and working groups so community
groups are completely open completely
free to participate in they also require
no resources or support from w3c which
makes it easy to provide them that way
the working groups are membership based
and I put corporate detection
organization
my child says so you know it could be 50
governments or schools and libraries
whatever but when is it's a paid
membership allows members of your
companies to work in working groups for
anything that is a standards track
specification the APR is essentially a
custom grant there's a royalty-free
license required for anything you
contribute in a community group so if
you contribute to us so actually to
contribute in a community group you have
to sign an agreement this Hetal that any
contributions you maybe will you will
grant royalty Frater once you get to a
working group it's actually a
royalty-free license for anything in any
of the specs produced by that working
room unless you disclose so they've been
working group you have an opportunity to
disclose that you have a patent and
request an exclusion from the policy and
the reason for that is there let's say
well that's fine but the group needs to
know so now they can make a decision
whether they want to change the spec or
not okay so there's no surprise dirties
and there are served mandated points at
which you get an opportunity to do this
exclusion and or disclosure working
style like the others in list if a
number of groups have regular
teleconferences but this is what I
wanted to talk about consensus w3c has
one of the longest
census requirements of any standards
organization I've ever seen ITF started
with the days rough consensus okay I'd
like to say rough consensus and running
code and you know the theorem groups in
general have adopted that rough
consensus does mean though that you
might you know you or five of you might
just be out of luck right and in fact I
believe you see that I need you feel so
strongly about that that that the way
they get they determine whether there's
consensus in a physical meeting is
through a hump and you might think that
sounds really strange okay so they say
hum if you want this on if you want this
and the reason they did that is so that
if you and your boss are sitting next to
each other your boss cannot tell what
you voted for okay so that they really
want people to be able to give an
independent opinion but to be able to
get a general sense of the room okay and
they had to do that right so they go oh
yeah it's pretty clear there's like
three people back there trying to come
really loudly okay but the rest of the
room just doesn't want to do that now
majority would install
[Music]
No is not about now NNW okay so right
like I so it's a vote and India's he
said you're trying very hard not to go
there we we have a very procedure I'm
very happy that in Oman time we have
never had a post it so it babe they give
to consensus
so w3c goes with them and just an
extremely strong notion of consensus and
it's great deal on rough consensus
basically remember when it started I
think you know sort of the look that I
to tell me the idea yeah but there they
said you know if there are people
disagree you need to talk and so that's
what that came from and it's just so it
can take longer to get some things out
and it doesn't mean that things don't go
forward without a few people disagreeing
that where you really don't really have
to work to make sure that you
accommodating disagreements nobody
that sounds like my understanding
it seems it's doesn't mean you just ride
my friend reveals that if you want to go
to pass those objections you have to
assist them in the man doesn't either
take them into account or say that I've
started necessarily I've been in lots of
iron that means and usually they will
ask those people but their needs are but
in many cases by the time you get to
that point you already know what their
opinions are it's just that they
disagree with the rest and if they're
really there's just like a couple I like
I hope I don't do this and and it's been
open less extensively then they go ahead
in principle that very similar in
practice w3c enforces a much deeper
little welcome
you really have to explain why good run
this thing now if there are two
different camps clearly idea real real
deadlock and so it gets resolved okay
but as far as a rough consensus they
will they will go over the the small bit
rough that's what rough consensus means
yeah so Rudy process yeah working drafts
which don't imply consensus and their
review process and implementation and
implementation as early as you can but
it's not want to talk about the review
process and know you see there are
basically three things that that you see
is really known for one is royalty-free
specs okay so that the specs themselves
are free and open to read it's not like
I said where you have to pay to get them
and then - it will let them everyone who
worked on it at least will give a
royalty-free license to it to implement
it
these funkin census is another one and
then the third one is their review
process is a formal review process where
it's this you know your works that may
require that other groups at w3c look at
it and actually outside of your
community you're required to demonstrate
than anyone else you might peripherally
be connected as when you did and then
they specifically now the accessibility
internationalization security and
privacy groups and every three seed who
must sign off now ITF does the same
thing actually IETF iesg does that
effectively the other groups and IETF
have to agree following and this is one
of the things that I think could be
looked at whether it's
I don't know whether Keith once that
needs it but for me to I I think I
eventually they're going to need
something more like this where there's a
clearer you know to find time when
security people get in there people who
are agreed to be yeah we're gonna be
security review yeah so WC has a lot of
different activities and I just listed
you know between ten and twenty four of
these community groups many of them are
not even active they all got started
rapidly a few years ago and you know
things were hot but they could all be
you know kicked up anytime anyone wants
to there are a couple of this group that
I've mentioned that I talked about these
centralized identifiers I'm not gonna
say anything really about what it is
more than others to say you don't like
email addresses Facebook accounts and
your eyes as identifiers than compartir
thanks okay so work is done public
mailing lists if again that readers and
this is vote for community groups and
and working groups now so you can follow
it very easily to contribute so as I
mentioned there is an IPR commitment at
at some level so it's a community group
it's a personal commitment if it's a
working group it's your company's
commitment for all specs that come out
of that group now to submit pull
requests in
requires membership and again that's
because of really serious concerns about
about now there there are other venues
if if that becomes a problem but but in
general is direct contributions that
require partnership absolutely said
because the 33 skills has a concept of
any fighter they explain it yeah so so
that there are cases where if you are an
outstanding individual and yeah you've
worked for a two-bit company that it
doesn't have the money to join own or
you work for that company that has
nothing to do with the web and won't
join there is mechanisms saying we want
this person in the group so bad we will
give them the right to do it but it's
very much cold as a privilege or
excellent if you wanna leave yeah it's
just like every relative you just do
more you volunteer you say I want to do
this now if you're going to do that
working group or community member or
advisor
okay okay so I'm gonna talk about you
two also I do short straw here so please
don't shoot the messenger like sure I
got something wrong because I don't know
that you want even agrees officially
what the process is I thought we were a
couple people and they're like yeah
that's kind of what it is kind of sort
of maybe so these are some statements
along those lines together this is very
informal pretty too
okay it's basic I did reporting by a
barrier foundation and and developers
okay and of course influenced by you
know individuals who have been
instrumental in aspirins of material
interestingly you know if you look at
who has final say I try to talk about
this 4:30 to see in the end right they
don't vote if there's a disagreement and
you get all the way sorted to the end if
I'm director will decide where the
director is Tim berners-lee Tim
berners-lee right now is on sabbatical
these emails about it for a long time
there's an experienced person
representing him who acts as the
director now that may change over time
okay so he - it's actually the editors
that have final say right now
for Egypt and that's only because
they're the ones who put it in I'm not
saying the arbitrary I'm not saying
they're inappropriate but today they are
the ones who make that decision there's
no other group it's
you know that can save the editors you
must undo this sorry did you expand on
for the illnesses on every one should we
not talk about the inhibitors not you to
document so this beacon chain and so on
right so Danny Ryan I uh you may need to
trust our each other whatever I say
the editors not be each two specs you
thank you question right so and I say as
editors I posted thinking if editors any
Ryan is kind of like one of the primary
ones he's not the only one but the BEF
has has taken on itself the role of
coordinating and making sure that
progress continues to happen so that's
why I ER so all of the documentation
everything you could expect these
licenses cc0 of whatever Universal there
is no IP are Kevin no bad policy rigging
so you give up there on by weekly
teleconferences but that's for
discussion but again all the work really
happens in you for the review process
that is normal you know the community
just reviews and talks I am not aware of
any any kind of formal review process
there there is not any formal stage at
which it will get a security review or
privacy review or whatever although
there are
when that tends to be requested more
than other times you know from my
perspective this is dissident area where
eventually that they really should look
at actually maybe and these saying hey
now is when we want to see that and the
advantage of having that not just get
lumped in with all of you is that it
lets the people developing it about the
upfront get to have some time working on
it before you know it's it like coalesce
their thoughts before it gets the
detailed security review okay so the
other thing is that just like each one
the work is very community focused so
there's this kind of belief you didn't
you didn't talk about this particularly
but it's more about implementation
aspects there's there's always this kind
of implicit what you can always pork it
you can always board because you don't
like it just for me no big deal okay
the truth is that a very large scale
confection would be considered filter
okay so no one wants any kind of before
if so this is where the rough consensus
thing happens right so you get a few
people who disagree and they're really
disagree strongly they're just going to
go and they're going to make their own
coffee and they're going to try to
convince the world that every
walk away from those losers you know
over in the room over there and follow
them but if there's two bigger group
than that's considered about me what did
I miss
because for me to talk about you two is
kind of embarrassing for me the reason
you go the job is like attention
okay yeah it's been off and on for a
while okay oh yeah all of you know this
you're a duck on okay phase zero phase 1
phase 2 phase zero implementation is
actually happening and there has been a
an interrupt event which is really
really really cool and it helped them a
lot as it does every group that does it
when you get stable enough apparently
the phase 1 spec work is is stabilizing
and phase 2 like I mean even coming up
with a list of what - - is doesn't work
and it's running out of all this great
sessions on this yesterday and the day
before everything you ever want to know
how okay oh oh there's getting involved
but yeah so you know there any number of
places you could go look I I am a little
biased I get some information from Ben
Edgington
and census because Pegasus because we
won't work there but he actually has a
really good blog that he maintains the
updates regularly about the status of
these two and it really is a good place
to if you just want to follow without
having to go read all the all they get
up issues and that's a really good way
to do it anyone can submit issues if you
want to participate and all of us I
believe this so part admit signing for
this so for most developers that's not
issue but one of the things that I have
learned from many standards efforts is
that there are often people who want to
contribute who are not necessarily
technical people they actually care
about you know societal impacts and
things like that and they may not know
how to use get up at all much less
figuring out how to how to get a
signature on everything so that is
something to think about and you know it
started bleeding boy you need to be
ready to live and breathe it because
it's it's all it's all in issues and
calls and people's heads and
you know and random documents spread all
over the internet so it's just not easy
almost like a race right leading is easy
you just gotta run faster than everyone
else yeah very much so I ask then you
know what to do when you gave me a list
like this I said okay great so make 30
pullet points places you can follow you
can contact Kenny Ryan a couple ways
there and there's a live stream of the
of them privately calls so I should just
have to go eat hub has a really great
overview of these two it talks about all
the clients that are working on
implementations and having to enter
off-site and it's a great place to learn
everybody to and get started
so unlike all the current standards that
are they've all talked about we have the
privilege maker to start from scratch
and learn from all of the mistakes that
have happened in the past and take all
the great things of work for you guys so
right now we're doing a lot of research
into how to open up the way to improve
maker to the entire anyone who has
access to you that I suppose and similar
to the queue process it inherits from
process to create a standard approach to
proposing new improvements and respects
and just overall changes
yeah
so there's a lot of things that we need
to consider when implementing a standard
for the maker protocol and overall
ecosystem some things that actually as a
breakup session I want to open it up to
people's opinion listen so if anyone has
anything that they think that worked
happy really
so standardizing the improved proposals
there's templates that allow people to
kind of propose it easily they have to
follow criteria and put it up there and
it gets her food review by an editor it
makes a look if it checks all the
criteria moved throughout the process of
lifecycle and get on its way to being
implemented governance overall I mean
from our perspective we how the
kickstart the program from the maker
foundation and it would be governed by
the community and the uncharitable ders
so we've been really considering what is
the best way to get consensus should we
continue to use our airboats should we
have kind of casual polls on discourse
forums or importance in general or
should we just hear a lot of waste on
community voice turns the workflow
everything would be focused around
github we would have the entire process
on there or people to spend the PRS be
using the templates that we provide
discussions would happen on this course
where the idea is Amana get rejected at
conception because it's been repeated or
there it just is an accepted revival
rocket chat to reach out to everyone
involved and without the loading
vehicles potentially to making sense us
to decide on these things there you the
review process would be a little more
formal than the EIP where the others do
review the specific criteria and make
sure all the check marks are made in
order to move it through the next stages
and the queue would be heavily involved
as well like I mentioned the idea of
having polls and votes is it is
interesting that you might want to
consider that key stakeholders that I
finally probably be likely involved are
the editors people who check all their
criteria to make sure this thing can go
through the authors are typically
technically to have an idea to improve
the protocol in itself coordinators are
the kind of managers who make everything
happen they coordinate with the the
editors the authors and other
stakeholders involved such as
implementers and they would also speak
with others to make sure that the
technical implementation is feasible and
technically sound and no potential
failure bonus so the types of changes
are really interesting so the processes
would be very different for a protocol
chain with the smart contract player you
have to go through very much deeper
process a process to be a change to the
program in general like we mentioned
earlier the editing process for changing
the epi one is intended to fine so it's
less likely to get pushed through if you
can find that at beginning it's a lot
easier to actually improve
it really there's just general requests
for comments on concerns with security
or failure differently in terms of our
activities were very much in a research
phase and trying to finalize their
program in itself once it's finalized it
all be accessible for github and a
dedicated website somewhere to be a few
website that tracks the history of all
the entities immersion the categories
that fall into the faces of the launch
would likely be we would release the
program all the documentation is there
for read everyone can go through it and
understand how it works the life cycle
of them the people involve stakeholders
and just overall the upgrade types the
others would be more formally defined
likely as I mentioned the mega
foundation would be kick-starting this
program so we probably have some
internally to manage the editor process
at first it would evolve over time where
community members would be vetted in
respect to key members based on their
contributions in the past and they
proceeded that way and then just forums
to one location to discuss everything I
suppose over social media Twitter
everything happens on Twitter but you
can really archive that and go back to
those conversations where people rip on
these security issues and forget where
it is so having it all in one place is
very important that's the purpose of the
this discuss all these things and I
think that's good
and then we have our first use case
where we to kind of implement it in dogs
that are on process and make it simple
for the rest of people in the community
to do that as well
so if you want to have a conversation
with us about this you can reach out to
us on our reddit make your chat probably
the best source to do that and the
telegram as well so I'm gonna pass it
off to Joey - so
one of the challenges that we run into
in this work is competing the
specifications developed at competing
with our organization and famously is
the
the Shelf specification or it had what
WG and III see developing different
versions technology for a long time and
it's only recently starting to that
situation is really resolved in terms of
those organizations working together
again so was intended Wilson to talk
about
between different organizations here
perhaps more pertinent to this group
would be if there are conflicts between
same specifications
polymeric Richard that a he a because
because we have to be on the inside to
see what we're doing is we take
responsibility for figuring has arisen
you know a conflict and as a general
principle the idea is you know on top of
what a theory makes to a first
approximation if if these things come in
conflict it's our job to fix it
basically no we are no longer creating
conflict and any place where we do think
we're going to seriously
public ethereal liquid aetherium stuff
policies we will go and write in the IPS
we will do that work in the standard ERP
process so far that hasn't actually come
up maybe we just haven't had a place
that's me well we're not mature enough
and that stuff is not good enough to be
like uranium change the public where
theorem works we we may in the next six
months or a year
yeah this there are science that we will
consider as we've talked about if we do
this thing and how to do is we need to
cut right the IP until the universe how
we're doing we serve a registry for
premium collapse of thing if we ain't
pretty well we should be really clear to
the rest of the universe what they're
precompile is aware it is and if I don't
know about how that risk web pages is
this is a registry where we will put
these things if we ever make them eat it
but again it might happen but we
essentially I think the conflict thing
is our equation
like that tend to about to be informal
standards to which one it by that I mean
like standards developed by national
bodies or by the w3c by the EPA by these
censorship groups they often will form
these leaves and partnerships as well
with organizations that they learn are
doing similar or related work and what
my understanding is that recently
period foundation
also developed a believes and ship air
to start this process we service we set
up a group which is the main networking
group and very unfortunately they're
sort of meet up at DEFCON to figure out
what they're gonna do and how they gonna
do it was exactly same time secession I
have no idea what they eat a lot as
possible to make it happen and so Mike
we did Jerry tell us what they did yeah
listen there was a session two days ago
where we were talking to club there was
an introductory session and the basic
idea is just to have a group that's
actually if she is the working group
he's a member of EA so dear staff Conoco
it was happening and that type they have
a free membership basically they exhaust
make sure that we're actually doing how
they organizations deal with conflict
you mentioned that often times when we
do disagree and then there can be
personal or personal matters brought to
the fore which are not relevant
there's care about WTC has one there's a
Dakota compact passionate and have a
positive working environment group that
formed specifically to come up with so
it's important it's amazing that you
have to teach people what they should
have learned into the party do you
remember that book and it's I'm sorry
you didn't have to learn how to get
along with people in you know in
kindergarten have people forget it we
totally have a form kind of connected
beyond the membership agreement which as
will be reasonable to Beth Israel and a
bunch of what I actually do is whenever
there are things reading to to rise up a
bit Aaron and actually talk to people so
look at you you get a situation where
you and those other guys you disagree
with them think are stupid also disagree
with you and they think you're stupid
stop talking to each other nicely then
this discussion is just going to explode
and nothing will happen a little make no
progress if one of you walks out of the
room we will lose some fairly important
perspectives so and taking although we
do want to get to some kind of everyone
and it might be there yes sometimes you
compromise is quite often a bit
and the solution is to say now we're not
going to have sort of your half one
consensus algorithm and half the other
consensus earlier than what I'm watching
we one side will agree to lose
completely and we will have one
consensus algorithm that's just easier
information for everybody but but you
still want less perspectives to do what
the email that one and so making sure
that we're doing stuff in a reasonable
and friendly way at us if you played out
you end up behind a device to paint me
we've never met
the ones who decide things and that
doesn't work out well
in the past I worked on projects that
accident pretty much as somebody said it
would be nice to people if you're any of
the falling racists like any comments
like all these different things you
should be warned you should be so so one
of the tricky things is they mrs.
self-organizing set up who is going to
take responsibility for calling out a
bad behavior and what happens is you
call that x1 calls that bad behavior
personally I think badly that around and
say what what do you tell me that I'm
doing wrong you're just being in high
school and there are different ways of
establishing some kind of authority that
you see or any and we could basically
say we establish some kind of authority
because we have written rules in a naked
since their communities color decided
that they will do this inside they will
back up one side or the other and what
they decided methods to the influences
out this community is going to function
in future the personalities projects
every project is required that's a
non-starter the project can define what
those behavior expectations are they
want to use an English
process like the contributor president
there won't do that if they want to use
something different that's also that's
also fine but we do require
but the other side of it is you want to
be careful in how much you ask the
community to do this attention is a
limited resource they expected me to
spend all of their time working on
making your thing work and they're not
gonna have any time left to make their
own thing work and actually making their
own thing work is probably why they're
really there so so there is this really
hard balance how do you make things easy
people to to do the right things to
participate and to put any do governance
we rather someone else do it
so we were talking about disagreements
and governance really helped solve the
technical disagreement piece so we're
gonna resolve different opinions on
parameter one and parameter two and then
the other kinds of disagreements that we
see mediated by organizations through
standards are also maybe political this
can certainly has interested parties for
different countries that is always do
you think that can really be a
consideration and when they have like in
China and then obviously disagreements
over how as standard should be
so I think what we would love to hear is
how people in this room feel that
standardization processes for aetherium
could be you know improved how we can
help remove obstacles to you for
participating obviously we've identified
a couple of things and there's the big
obstacle with Yeti one that we've been
talking about what are things that
concern you what excites you what would
make it you know easier for you to do
your job frankly its selection
certification thinking or and also
generally what other questions might you
have about how the organizations we've
talked about today the process
how'd it easier for you to like improve
I'm like what do you want oh that's that
before like the most important part is
actually that is is that there's a
process out there like there is
publisher somewhere it's easily
accessible for me and easily
understandable me because also I myself
I don't really have a lot of time to
read through all these processes
scriptures so if you give me a process
chart that I could just follow and I
just read up like I'm in that state so
this is what I was supposed to do this
well I'm this import this well I was my
activity in this year and I should wait
for some moments at this stage it's
totally clear and what I have to do in
that please step is not in the ERP in
that case is not in any repo boat and
nobody knows what to do with it so that
this happened two times for me that's
why I took from a big February when I
started writing it until now and still
not really proven about the process to
actually get it that hard because I lost
track of it at least three times because
I was actually under the assumption
now give you some feedback on it and
there wasn't even sure who is going to
give feedback but it's kind of just give
me one big picture of how it's supposed
to be just to be clear that what you
were talking about now is that Arizona
made that VIP life I usually find it as
an eternity then I presented it as the
Chordettes meeting and it was decided it
just given it to you if you were and
then turned around again with just more
confusing Indian is this the security
consideration yeah I mean I definitely
shouldn't be able to be happy one might
people who are others to make changes by
I mean personally my patients always
mean that the process could be hard
enough to understand now but there's so
much worse appeared to really run an ear
to read all the other entities that have
mean the idea and trying to figure out
one that we just don't all that one's
unfortunately some area to help us
how many followers they have one
document which is here's what you need
to do and just that document when you
need to know one of the things is you
have each week and every week no one
nobody
for this they still they speak short
enough to have a look at it
understand what it says and more or less
remember and and one of these is if you
make changes since taste true if you
change things every six months you
should at least of these what we changed
over the last six months
yeah people would read the doc so we
need a appear to be anyone that sees
that modifies EMP what saying here is
how you make the as to the IP one yeah
and even we can have no play process so
the big question and that is who can
accept us a what what was the threshold
actually only be considered citizen so I
read here people I understood in the way
when I want to change any process
they have media Peters actually changing
process so that's kind of like this is
how what we are doing including the
change to ear p1 them in the end but
with a description of why and all the
discussions alone you can even track the
changes which makes sense because that's
only editing it you might lose why you
even introduced that change that you
keep and you stick to your actual
process that yeah so that's why I
started with this one and at some point
you know we all kind of decided that it
only that only requires a PR to EMP one
I put everything in the people
requesting yeah and then we had lots of
discussions a few changes they still
want to change this pending right now to
make it more clear what to do but then
it was kind of a hard lesson to learn to
follow follow the process but it was
mainly because it wasn't very clear to
me what the actual process is so saying
expectation to make clear I like who is
holding this thing now with the next
just gonna do something precious
what is help for you like I traded a
process chart for myself just to be able
to next time to swallow that one I can
either post it to the magician's forum
or pin into the earpiece forum somehow
and we can together work on that one
it's a toil think so we can elaborate
the change we have you know so again
just verifies this thing prices for
writing the IPS versus purses for
changing the IP one this is for writing
you peace let the whole process also
inches America so I feel under the
assumption that whenever I want to amend
the Miyake
I should actually read meat the
earpieces so if the IP one says that in
my opinion it's a greater certainly if
you want to change a draftee I pay you
said yeah and the widening office in the
draft and accepted if you want to change
finally you should write a new IMEI P
that claims to obsolete the other one
describes or ideally describes the whole
thing
sorry yeah when it's not final I know
the IP one is the sufficient state it's
active because it would mean if you have
another it also actually might go to the
first one and I figure out that there
are five things and most recently the
generation side would quite easily
generate a back leg missing everything
that says it obsolete it's this food so
far we've been feeling is there at least
to push back that something Jones
claimed to write me out the enjoyment of
these bolts the idea at least Bob says
yes that's okay you know because I don't
want to get into a situation where
something's like my stuff is way better
than yours they're more uses obviously
you know so that I think was room for
argument there off with a anyone should
be able to just save the substances and
that's just an analyzer you think or
whether it should require that the
consensus of the original authors and
that's because there is no official or
arbitrary yeah I mean II and IETF
there's a point when you're done
apparently and so you can write as many
drafts as you want to try to obsolete
something else but it's only when it's
going to always be the process and its
final but then it actually does obsolete
that Oh
you know the entire agency really does
so if we follow the ietf process then
the obsoletes thing becomes
authoritative every winter that's a
final standard the alternative is that
we just say that this is this is part of
mistake mistake size it's also it
obsoletes they're sort of you want to
follow the speak you shouldn't follow
that's big
I think the ideas persists probably
being at 1 in this case yeah the
probably getting to at some point in the
second nature look at a is this big B is
this big big newer and shinier what is
the this is actually doing one of the
important because if you have my five
specs that you said well they're all as
good as each other we don't want to
judge anything I walk in with my new
company and 50,000 developers to do some
work you know what am I gonna work on
yeah people want a random yeah
it becomes an unhealthy situation and
she slows us down
it's people like that's big and this is
where I really like to see
magician was written because if you had
a working group that says they are the
working group for what standards or
whatever then the business could say
generally we won't accept what standard
the open e drafts accept from that work
you know unless you have a really good
reason white everybody could come
tantalum and the networking group could
take all the job of trying to encourage
standards and so on because I think it's
a tractable to speak to editors to to
understand the entire ecosystem and know
when something's check there's more it's
irrelevant
globally do you have in your local
service somewhere like we were
processing how to give feedback to the
process be a dozen three three speakers
33 cities process includes
take this person CC has a process yeah
it's a skies eventually he writes this
and that's what they do is they discuss
changes to the process and it does get
update actually images
take the AP process or informational
there is a informational it's type of
VIP transcend base chain wouldn't it be
the suggestion to through a process I
mean I think ultimately an informational
EIP doesn't have any power to change a
thing so if you wanted to change it I
think maybe it just discussing it rather
than saying it's the IP and in
attempting to do you can see this it's
not a change to the I mean what would be
a birthday financing we can also be
pretty interesting to that's been an
active discussion reason they like me I
my argument was for a variety of thing
where we don't actually number need a
piece
State in that way you can assume that if
it's big number that's kind of been
adopted and will likely eventually make
it to a standard and then your draft is
just your draft you know it's not the
draft that that was made objections so
instead I think
something like that we had if the drafts
inside was a long enough estate you know
about to create the payout would it be
author it's going to be managed in a
week that 90 minutes as stale as
don't and then a week later manages that
day you can if you want but it helps
clear the clutter the tc39 we have
separate repositories in the requirement
that's that anything that's a draft that
is a feature that's just strip being
foreclosed from work done has to live
and that in that repository with the
repulsive - what's doing ever and it's
only when it's finalized that it gets to
move into the repository of the actual
surface of that process I think in the
github looking system it make it amazing
it's just
you've also trade you know you just look
to the Arizona Sabrina to be merged the
chain means its final but unfortunately
that was I was overruled on that maybe
it's time to reopen the discussion I
think that's that's kind of how a lot of
other
exactly
yes but we have to do it when it gets to
final eventually so why no yes make that
decision oh let's split earlier and if
it leads to problems as people like file
an issue that leaves you also train with
like a 5 sequence description of their
idea and they say please see 1 2 3 4
it's not me but it's just you have
initially write some sentences you know
this is I see you have to require office
you know
[Music]
anything anyone else wanted to ask about
over now you're all here for the next
session incentivization basically
mentioned before explain anything
how to get more engagement so I said I'm
generally very skeptical about one of
these things about building standards is
it's kind of painful boring work and
what to do is sign up and say yes I
would like more of that pain than other
people and I'm not getting enough with
my daily life but actually there's a
method anyway I know of keeping the
rubbish ocean down a bit today that
doesn't solve the entire problem but as
soon as you set up incentives for people
to to do stuff this is like building
bureaucracies yeah you don't want to
build like a despot free approach or
mechanism to my art that's where a
really solid and healthy community
ecosystem can come into play and so you
know you want to unless an organization
is willing to
say but Brian from Microsoft in a
position that allows him to spend 40
percent of his time and of a suspect and
and that that happens with with
particularly useful or important aspects
you know that bigger companies will step
up and and pay for the resources to do
that but in a case where maybe the
features where the technologies are less
business critical you don't have as many
companies rolling up to it willing to
step up and give that investment so the
community needs to fill the gap where
and I would people should be paid for
their labor but open collective and
patreon and those things aren't going to
really pay anybody salary to get get
done if there are other kinds of
community events community spaces where
people can be celebrated recognized
also I think in many cases they need to
kind of get to have a little bit of that
credit given them and a little bit of
that light department like only Thank
You Nick for all the time that you've
been spending we're gonna kind of like
defer a bit to your expertise because
you've been owning this process one of
the things one of the does make sense is
that if you find people are doing good
work not only do you get 50 or they
should be based on
that you said definitely Stefan we'd
like what you need rather than pull you
put its thing this is a one-time thing a
foundation or or the open projects we
can do something here tonight so these
have seen me if do this the most sane
people so what are the things that they
can do is like you know maybe provide a
thank-you gift
I mean I did this for all of my
maintainer zuv the Jazz foundation I
gave everybody and thank you card and
assured and some stickers that was like
heartfelt Lee I appreciate the ship that
you put up with and then to your point
Dan like if you can afford it bringing
them paying for their fair to come to a
community event we're having a special
event just for them at a Def Con for
example it's not expensive to say we're
going to have a lunch you know to thank
you for your time and
your colleagues in this space little
things
so one of our son was one of the things
I have seen in here is people watch
people do much work I see some other
people get rewarded and they don't get
what they think is their reward and they
so often do and I say that money in
other places it's like you alienate
people who are doing hard work by
rewarding other people and perception of
injustice and and the problem is it's
really difficult not to do that right
because you don't know what people think
they should be entitled to so if you
start sitting at entitlements and it
gets messy
they're fast and so yet is pile of
things encouraging people to recognize
basically the whole point of doing this
is we have a really should job which you
probably won't get thanked for properly
and you should expect it to be painful
rather the man sitting anything up well
you will get like rewarded that you will
get Authority probably if you do and
stuff you will in fact and you certainly
should but but Wendy will come to that
expectation you can really have set them
in a way that if they come with this
sort of it's almost better the way they
you know them in a better place question
to you how do you prevent silence across
the word improves that you mentioned for
exactly what some other groups what's
the mechanism to be those separate
entities so the moment they would still
be very early they they haven't taken
out of them some responsibility for
their areas the way I would like them to
do and so I think they can
I mean so so 33c sort of looks of that
problem seriously has done for 20 years
and the answer is that what you if you
bear in mind that this is an important
problem that you need to keep addressing
then you keep remembering you should
have done
you do nothin and it has been said they
had what they call these horizontal
review groups groups looking at
accessibility privacy architectural
consistencies interesting thing to hope
for on the web where there is not
security in specialization and those
groups get because they look at all of
the different bits of work the thing
they're looking at quite often in those
groups he white people are saying wait a
minute like this thing in this thing
with the same and it's one of those
people whose is a US should be like not
doing this two different ways that the
same thing he thought about talking to
each other but though he also has
because it has a formal decision-making
point at the end of it one of the things
that they were gonna take to this is my
well why are we reinventing this wheel
that we already made a square one last
week what's with this a second one we
shouldn't do that and so is an objection
like that comes up basically
let's go see how they're about it and it
might be the answer is here turns out no
one like that square wheels we had tried
once and but it's it's still good at
Hopkins though like press this doesn't
get worked up
there you go thanks
[Applause]
you