On 25 mrt 2008, at 4:58, Harald Tveit Alvestrand wrote:
The WG scheduling tool has 3 lists of "groups to avoid conflicts
with", 1st, 2nd and 3rd priority.
I don't know if these are visible to anyone but the requesting WG
Chair, but they're listed on the confirmation notice from the tool;
I've made it a practice to copy them to the WG I schedule, and
modify the list according to comments.
So I'd ask:
Were the meetings you had problems with listed in each others'
- If not, it's a problem at the "data input" level.
- If yes, it's a problem at the "conflicts resolutions" level.
I don't know, I haven't seen these lists.
Apparently the scheduling situation wasn't (much) worse for most
others. In my case, I had huge overlap on monday and tuesday and then
pretty much nothing of interest happened on wednesday and thursday.
Although it's useful to have wg chair input on scheduling issues, I
don't think that's sufficient. What we need is to see which wgs have
overlapping constituencies. We actually do have this data already, in
the form of the blue sheets. But obviously it's not usable in its
current, analog form.
So I'm offering to build an online version of the blue sheets so in
the future, it will be easy to determine which wgs attract the same
people and overlap can be avoided more effectively.
IETF mailing list