At 11:41 20/03/05 -0800, Dave Crocker wrote:
In a very real sense, we do not require IETF meeting scheduling requests to
obligate the requests' organizers to get any productive work done. If we
treated IETF meeting time as the scarce, valuable resource that it really is,
we would almost certainly require more up-front and "objectives-based"
planning. I suspect that would also lead to fewer meeting slots, which might
allow for more time available to the groups that do want to have significant
discussion.
[Merely observing, not proposing anything...]
If your last point is true, it suggests a model more like the W3C technical
plenary, in which the general format is an all-day plenary in the middle of
the week, preceded and followed by parallel 2-day (sometimes 1-day) working
group sessions for those WGs with face-to-face work to conduct. Frequent
coffee breaks and on-site lunches provide opportunity for informal cross-WG
interactions. (This seems to work well for W3C, but that doesn't
necessarily translate to IETF modi operandi, with their far grater emphasis
on core business conducted in email.) The face-to-face meetings are
commonly supported by IRC for recording and remote participants.
#g
------------
Graham Klyne
For email:
http://www.ninebynine.org/#Contact
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf