On Tue, 14 May 2019, Michael Richardson wrote:
I think that WGs need to have virtual interims partway between meetings in which to hold presentation-style events where the initial problem statement is provided. This accomodates the "need" to present, while not wasting super-expensive meeting time.
This seems like a good idea. However, I find that the in-person mic line format of "discussions" isn't a great way to actually discuss things. Very few people get up to the mic, there is the language barrier for a non-trivial amount of attendees, and very few people (or the total in the room) actually step up to ask questions. This is of course different in different WGs, the span of different ways of doing things is substantial.
So let's take a step back and ask what the presentation of a draft actually adds. I believe it's the overview format of creating a slide deck that present the introduction to the draft that gives this added overview of what the draft is trying to achieve, and then people can decide what it is they are interested in.
These interims, they by their nature means people all across the globe need to participate at the same time. This is a strain on some people regardless of when on the 24 hour clock it is. So perhaps instead if each draft author who wants a slot on the WG agenda has to create a standalone slide deck that sums up the meat of the draft in 5-10 slides together with the intro/abstract of the draft (which then by virtue of need of gathering attention has to actually sum up the draft properly), and then there is a non-synchronised "virtual interim" that is a one week review period and then people have to "upvote" or similar if they think the draft makes sense to bring on the agenda. This would involve developing new systems but shouldn't be too complicated.
It would perhaps be even better if there was more focus and perhaps even "draft interims" where there were sessions scheduled to have real-time discussions about a specific draft, if there was enough interest.
Personally I still think the mailing list format of review and discussions are generally the best, but I've been told there are others who do not agree. So... the ones who think that this isn't great, would any of the above make more sense to you?
-- Mikael Abrahamsson email: swmike@xxxxxxxxx
