RE: Announcement of SMIng Author & Editor Meeting

["Wijnen, Bert (Bert)" <bwijnen@lucent.com>]

Comments inline

> ----------
> From: 	Andy Bierman[SMTP:abierman@cisco.com]
> Sent: 	Friday, February 23, 2001 9:04 PM
> To: 	Wijnen, Bert (Bert)
> Cc: 	Durham, David; Wes Hardaker; sming@ops.ietf.org
> Subject: 	Re: Announcement of SMIng Author & Editor Meeting
> 
> Hi Bert,
> 
> > > These sound very suspiciously like agenda items for the main WG
> > > meeting, not the author and editor meeting (which is what I was asking
> > > about).  I hope this is true?
> > They may be ob both agenda's, but I can understand the authors/editors
> > want to make sure that they have indeed asddressed them. And you can
> > join in in both sessions if you want.... I do not see what the issue is?
> > 
> 
> Perhaps the issue is simply 'terminology confusion'.
> Perhaps there's a more serious 'inclusion' issue here. I'm not sure.
> 
> Traditionally, Editor Workshop meetings are held after the WG
> meets, so the editors can efficiently capture the WG consensus and
> editing directions resulting from mailing list and WG meeting discussion.
> It is highly irregular, even exclusionary, for such a meeting to
> be held just before an IETF, for the purpose of resolving open issues.
> 
> The discussion is San Diego resulted in agreement that an interim meeting
> should be scheduled.  If this proposed meeting was called an WG Interim
> meeting,
> as the WG expected, this email thread wouldn't have occurred.  Why was
> it changed to from an Interim to an Editors meeting anyway?
> 
David first announced as "interim"... which is not allowed according to IETF
rules, because we want a 30 day advance notice so people can plan to attend.
So I "instructed" David that it cannot be called an interim meeting.

So I checked with David what he was thinking of. Form what I understood
of his response, the idea was that the editors would sit together to go over
any open editing issues and open other issues to prepare for the meeting
as planned in the regular IETF meeting slots. The editors felt that maybe
anyone who wanted could join in, and so that is what it is. And so David
re-annouced it as an "open editors/authors" meeting.

So ... yes I think it is a matter of confusing terms that has been used.
But... pls let's get back to technical matters.

Bert
> > Bert (AD hat on)
> > 
> > > --
> > > Wes Hardaker
> > > NAI Labs
> > > Network Associates
> > >
> 
> Andy
>