ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Remote Participation Services

2013-02-07 11:57:25
Hi Michael,

+1 for the deadline
- 1 for the unified slide deck: from my experience with Meetecho, this is not 
always a good idea, both because of the deck's dimensions and of the 
difficulties in automatically recognizing speakers' switches (e.g. for the 
recordings of the single presentations).

My 2 cents,

Simon

Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf(_at_)sandelman(_dot_)ca> ha scritto:


"Thomas" == Thomas Narten <narten(_at_)us(_dot_)ibm(_dot_)com> writes:
   Thomas> IMO, what is missing is operational Best Practices. We seem
   Thomas> to be lacking them (are any written down?) And we don't
   Thomas> follow them consistently, especially from one WG to
   Thomas> another. Many of the problems I see with remote
   Thomas> participation facilties have to do not with the technology
   Thomas> per se, but with lack of proper training and advance
   Thomas> testing. I get the general sense that getting the remote

+5.

I am setting a deadline for slides for IETF86 for my WG, and I will be
doing a unified slide deck.  I might allow text on a slide to be
updated the day before... but no slides, no speak.


-- 
Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF(_at_)sandelman(_dot_)ca>, Sandelman Software 
Works