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. --jl > -----Original Message----- > From: Pekka Savola [mailto:pekkas@netcore.fi] > Sent: Wednesday, July 24, 2002 1:43 AM > To: Scott Brim > Cc: ietf@ietf.org > 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 > allegedly wrote: > > > Hi - > > > > > > Relatively few WG minute takers pay much > > > attention to the Mortimer/Agnes/Duane bullet in > > > http://www.ietf.org/instructions/minutes.html > > > > > > 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," > then "Duane > 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 >