On Wed, Oct 1, 2014 at 2:30 PM, Eric Burger <eburger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Oct 1, 2014, at 2:25 PM, Mary Barnes <mary.h.barnes@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:On Wed, Oct 1, 2014 at 12:20 PM, Andrew Sullivan <ajs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:On Wed, Oct 01, 2014 at 11:58:53AM -0500, Mary Barnes wrote:
> [MB] I just registered for a W3C meeting and that was $75.00/day and they
> will be providing me a gluten-free lunch. So, that would be $600 for 6
> meeting days. [/MB]
As Ray pointed out, however, the fruit:vegetable comparison issues
show up pretty quickly, even with other SDOs working in similar areas.
W3C, for example, is a membership organization, and so it not only has
the meeting fees but also the corporate fees (which, for US firms, is
either $2250, $7900, or $68500 per year).[MB] Actually, I'm attending the meetings as an observer, although, I think I'm now legally an individual participant (since I own no IPR, those terms were easy to agree with). That's something most other membership based SDOs don't allow. In these roles, I'm not required to pay a membership fee in order to attend meetings. [/MB]The equivalent would be if we let you come to an IETF meeting where you would not be allowed to talk or contribute to consensus.
[MB] In the vast majority of WG sessions, that seems to be what the majority of participants do. Many come to IETF because it's an optimal way to get the information they need to do their jobs and to network.
[/MB]
Remember, W3C is a membership organization, and consensus is (when things go south) by member (corporate) vote.
[MB] You're the one that brought W3C into this thread ;) I responded based on my own experience that it is indeed much less expensive for me to go to a W3C meeting to achieve the objectives for my job. [/MB]