Re: Draft minutes 28 February 2012

On 02/28/2012 11:16 PM, Josh Soref wrote:
> Attached are Draft minutes from today's teleconference, 28 February 2012, for approval at the next meeting.
>
> Action item to the chairs: we're supposed to approve the previous meeting's minutes at the current meeting! -- please add this to the agenda -- for next meeting you can approve both meetings' minutes :).
>
> Speaking of next meeting. If Anant (@MWC ; not present) finishes his previous task, we can have a meeting in about two weeks. Otherwise, it'll have to be after the IETF meeting. Tentatively that meeting should be after US Tax Day -- 16 April 2012 - action to chairs to create a doodle to pick a date and then to announce the date.
>
> Please do review the minutes, I'm unfamiliar w/ many of the speakers and could easily have misattributed someone (tim/derf specifically).
>
> Adambe: you're the only person for whom I've definitively lost content, I'm sorry, please feel free to reply and I can amend the minutes.
>
> For convenience, and to try to elicit corrections, I've included excerpts from the places where I know I've lost content:
>
>> burn: that's correct
>> ... because I don't think bandwidth relates to aspect ratio
>> ... I think a more interesting thing is between 2 and 3
>>
>> adambe: XX2

XX2: I don't know how to interpret a mandatory constrain that has lower 
priority than a non-mandatory constrain.

>> adambe: [...]

...: All mandatory constraints before optional is kind of what I was 
thinking about with my previous comment about the mandatory constrain at 
position 3.

>> burn: I wanted to do clarifying questions first

This is basically what I think I said. I'll try to think about the fact 
that we have a scribe next time and express myself in a more scribable 
way. :)

/Adam

Received on Wednesday, 29 February 2012 10:36:33 UTC