W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-egov-ig@w3.org > February 2009

Re: F2F Provocation Statements

From: Jose M. Alonso <josema@w3.org>
Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2009 20:31:24 +0100
Cc: "'eGov IG'" <public-egov-ig@w3.org>
Message-Id: <6C5F905F-D0F4-46D2-AF96-3C12E867385D@w3.org>
To: "Owen Ambur" <Owen.Ambur@verizon.net>
Owen,

I was just trying to summarize what John mentioned on the call. I'd  
prefer him to reply with his thoughts.

Your proposal makes sense to me.

-- Jose


El 19/02/2009, a las 17:36, Owen Ambur escribió:
> Jose & John, I don't think we should assume that participants will be
> present for two full days.  Thus, it seems to me that each session  
> should
> begin with a relatively short period of brainstorming to identify the
> provocations, leading into a longer period for discussion of the  
> particular
> topic.  The opening session might provide an overview of them, as  
> implied in
> the current draft of the agenda.  However, if all of the  
> provocations are
> front-loaded in the agenda, folks who can only be present for that  
> part of
> the agenda won't have the opportunity to participate in the  
> discussion.
> Conversely, it is only reasonable to expect that: a) additional  
> provocations
> will arise during discussion of each topic, and b) if folks are  
> unable to
> participate in the full agenda on both days, they are more likely to  
> attend
> if they know they will be able to contribute both to the  
> provocations as
> well as the discussion of the particular topic(s) of greatest  
> interest to
> them.
>
> Owen
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-egov-ig-request@w3.org [mailto:public-egov-ig-request@w3.org 
> ]
> On Behalf Of Jose M. Alonso
> Sent: Thursday, February 19, 2009 9:48 AM
> To: Owen Ambur
> Cc: eGov IG; John Sheridan
> Subject: Re: F2F Provocation Statements
>
> Owen, thanks much for getting this started.
>
> Although it was John who proposed it, I was actioned to remind the
> list. I hope I got it right.
>
> The plan is to propose topics to have a provocation/reflection/action
> approach:
> 1) dedicate morning(s) to "provoke" with burning issues
> 2) analyze how those could be addressed
> 3) come up with actions that the Group should take and where it would
> be of most help
>
> I'm not sure if we should stick to the proposed structure around
> topics or if it would be better to do the provocation part in the
> first morning/afternoon on all topics, then move from there.
>
> -- Jose
>
> ps: this closes ACTION-45
>
>
> El 18/02/2009, a las 17:23, Owen Ambur escribió:
>> Per discussion on the telecon this morning, I added a few
>> provocation statements to the draft agenda
> athttp://www.w3.org/2007/eGov/IG/wiki/F2F2
>>
>> BTW, the deadline for proposed additions to the FEA TRM was January
>> 31 -- http://et.gov/stage4.htm -- meaning that it may not be
>> possible to incorporate additional changes until next year … which
>> in turn means the TRM is virtually guaranteed to become irrelevant
>> due to being out-dated.
>>
>> Owen Ambur
>> Co-Chair Emeritus, xmlCoP
>> Co-Chair, AIIM StratML Committee
>> Member, AIIM iECM Committee
>> Invited Expert, W3C eGov IG
>> Communications/Membership Director, FIRM Board
>> Former Project Manager, ET.gov
>> Brief Bio
>>
>
>
>
>
>
Received on Friday, 20 February 2009 19:32:06 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 20 February 2009 19:32:07 GMT