I agree with Pekka and Scott. When I was chairing an active working group,
I put significant effort into collecting detailed minutes so as to record
the meeting discussions, not just the results. In response, I often
received positive comments from WG participants (both attendees and
non-attendees) stating that they found the extended descriptions useful;
this suggests to me that the effort was well spent. In particular, I think
that distributing extended minutes helps to enfranchise those who aren't
present in person, and that it's an effective vehicle to trigger e-mail
discussion to clarify issues that different attendees understood
differently. It's useful to preface more detailed minutes with a shorter
summary, but I don't believe that this is a preferable replacement for a
full-scale meeting record.
From: Pekka Savola [mailto:pekkas(_at_)netcore(_dot_)fi]
Sent: Wednesday, July 24, 2002 1:43 AM
To: Scott Brim
Subject: Re: how to take minutes
On Tue, 23 Jul 2002, Scott Brim wrote:
On Tue, Jul 23, 2002 05:54:25PM -0700, Randy Presuhn
Relatively few WG minute takers pay much
attention to the Mortimer/Agnes/Duane bullet in
Is it time to update the web page to reflect actual practice?
Might it be easier to get people to take minutes if they
realized that we're not asking for blow-by-blow transcripts?
Some of these meeting notes that capture (some of) the words
but miss the point of the discussion.
That last point is a useful one, but when I can't be at a meeting I
strongly prefer blow-by-blow transcripts, even babbling, over just
results. I want Meeting Notes with enough detail that I
can pick out
the motivations and other nuances. "Minutes", for the Proceedings,
should not exclude them.
I haven't written minutes for any IETF meeting myself, so perhaps I
shouldn't comment. But on the page:
'They should not follow a "Mortimer said," then "Agnes said,"
said," format, nor should they contain a detailed list of changes to a
document. While these forms may be helpful to the folks who actually
attend the sessions, they are less helpful to those who have a more
general interest in the groups' activities.'
This makes an implicit assumption that anyone reading minutes is only
"generally interested" in the group's activities.
I thought attendance in meetings for w.g. members was not
supposed to be
necessary in the IETF?
Pekka Savola "Tell me of difficulties surmounted,
Netcore Oy not those you stumble over and fall"
Systems. Networks. Security. -- Robert Jordan: A Crown of Swords