Philip,
Is there really a demand for interim meetings that cannot be supported
in IETF regular meetings? We meet 3 times a year, why isn't that
enough? I don't know of any W3C working group meeting more than three
times a year.
Rather than trying to pile requirements onto interim meetings, can we
work out a way to accommodate these needs in regular meetings?
I would like to suggest we go a stage further and change the way the
IETF meetings work.
People are having interim meetings because a one or two day meeting on
one topic is a lot more productive than an IETF WG session.
Or because weekly meetings are more efficient.
Regards, Benoit
For certain types of work and at certain stages, a concentrated
meeting is the only productive approach.
W3C has always taken this approach, they have one annual meeting and a
series of interims. The annual meetings are structured like an
academic conference with a plenary track and a series of breakout
tracks on one topic.
Now we can't and should not change every IETF meeting structure
because a lot of IETF work is not of the type that benefits from this
mode of work and those that do do not necessarily benefit all the time.
But we could arrange one IETF on the W3C format as an experiment.
There are pros and cos to both ways of working. I don't see that we
have to limit ourselves just to one approach.
Early in a WG lifecycle I just want to spend two days doing nothing
apart from working through the issues list and kill off all the bike
shed issues. Later on when getting close to completion you might want
to have another bootcamp to close off all the open issues. In between
you probably want more of an update.