Thanks Bob, +1 on all of your points.
I would also like to add that the quality of presentations could IMHO be
improved quite a bit if it was easier possible to add the work done for slides
also into final RFC. We for once had tried this with network protocol flow-charts,
but gave up on the RFC picture rules being too harsh to allow for this.
Cheers
Toerless
On Tue, Apr 04, 2023 at 05:21:59PM -0700, Bob Hinden wrote:
> Brian,
>
> > On Apr 4, 2023, at 2:42 PM, Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> >
> > In the ideal world there'd be no presentation because everybody read the draft, one slide with open issues and then the discussion.
>
> I don’t agree that there should be no presentations.
>
> Slides can be useful to focus the discussion, even if people have read and understand the drafts. For example, a short overview and then a slide for each open issues.
>
> Slides are also good for non-native english speakers, where reading the material helps their comprehension of what is being discussed.
>
> Slides can be useful, but not surprisingly can be abused. We all seen slides that attempt to put the whole document into a single slide, but this doesn’t mean they can’t be useful.
>
> What is needed is for w.g. chairs to review slides and work with the presenters to make useful presentations.
>
> Bob
>
>
> >
> > Brian
> >
> >> Additional tracks and/or longer days and/or full-length Fridays will likely be needed and the community should weigh those against their downsides for in-person and remote attendees.
> >> Lars
> >> .
> >
>
--
---
tte@xxxxxxxxx
