Dear colleagues, On Sun, Apr 22, 2018 at 05:38:16PM +0200, Beatrice Martini wrote: > > > 3.2.2 would be nice, also because asking hotels/venues for this also > > would prompt them to include it in their renovation plans. > > Unless a country's legislation is specifically against this use of public > facilities, this should not be too difficult to require/provide. > > A venue does not need to have restrooms already designated to be used as gender > neutral facilities. I do not exactly object to adding this criterion to section 3.2 somewhere, but I hope people understand what it means. Items in that section are things that we want to have, but that we can trade away against other considerations. Moreover, anything that is missed in that section must be included in the announcement of the venue. Finally, the negotiators are instructed that anything that meets the criteria in this section is highly desirable compared to other criteria. I hope people are alert to the possibility that this would mean trading off (say) affordability against the availability of gender neutral facilities. In any case, I think this does not belong in 3.2.2, which is about the Venue, not the Facility or any IETF Hotel. The Venue seems to wide to talk about with this criterion. I should note for the record that, while I am currently an IAOC member (and its chair), I'm writing this in my capacity as a long participant in the mtgvenue WG. Best regards, A -- Andrew Sullivan ajs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
