W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-multilingualweb-lt@w3.org > February 2013

RE: [All] review draft agenda, preparation call 1 March 1-3 p.m. UTC (Friday this week)

From: Pedro L. Díez Orzas <pedro.diez@linguaserve.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2013 11:15:15 +0100
To: "'Felix Sasaki'" <fsasaki@w3.org>
Cc: "'Yves Savourel'" <ysavourel@enlaso.com>, <public-multilingualweb-lt@w3.org>, "'dave lewis'" <dave.lewis@cs.tcd.ie>, "'Clemens Weins'" <Clemens.Weins@cocomore.com>, "'Phil Ritchie'" <philr@vistatec.ie>, "'Ankit Srivastava'" <asrivastava@computing.dcu.ie>, "'Arle Lommel'" <Arle.Lommel@dfki.de>
Message-ID: <0f6e01ce14d3$55f3d060$01db7120$@linguaserve.com>
Thank you Felix,

Also it can be simplified technical demos/business scenario, so each demo is organized by the participants internally. It makes it shorter and faster:

Showcase:
 	Technical demo (one or more participant)
	Business usage scenario

I confirm I can Friday  1st March 13.00 UTC.
Best,
Pedro

-----Mensaje original-----
De: Felix Sasaki [mailto:fsasaki@w3.org] 
Enviado el: miércoles, 27 de febrero de 2013 10:10
Para: "Pedro L. Díez Orzas"
CC: 'Yves Savourel'; public-multilingualweb-lt@w3.org; 'dave lewis'; 'Clemens Weins'; 'Phil Ritchie'; 'Ankit Srivastava'; 'Arle Lommel'
Asunto: Re: [All] review draft agenda, preparation call 1 March 1-3 p.m. UTC (Friday this week)

Hi Pedro, what you say makes a lot of sense. I will revisit the agenda now and we can discuss it today at the call. All, if you cannot
participate: does Friday this week work for you? I didn't see anybody protesting, but I'm not sure if this is because everybody prefers 1 March over 8 March for the prep call, or if people didn't see the mail ;)

Best,

Felix

Am 26.02.13 21:09, schrieb Pedro L. Díez Orzas:
> Hi Felix, Yves, all,
>
> Just two things:
>
> 1) The Selected usage scenarios "Pedro: ITS2.0 Implementation Experience in HTML5 with the SpanishTax Agency (WP3, WP4)" is only about WP4, not wp3. I will use a base the presentation in Rome and adapt to Lux (in Roma is the client who present it).
>
> 2) About merging agenda, I think Yves is right. We could organize each case from two different points of view, technical and business. For example, for two demos of WP3 and WP4:
>
> TMS-CMS (WP3):
> 	Technical demo 1: Cocomore
> 	Technical demo 2: Linguaserve
> 	Business usage scenario: Hans v. Freyberg: Standardization for the 
> Multilingual Web: A Driver of Business Opportunities
>
> Online Translation System (WP4):
> 	Technical demo 1: Linguaserve
> 	Technical demo 2: DCU
> 	Technical demo 3: Lucy
> 	Business usage scenario: Pedro: ITS2.0 Implementation Experience in 
> HTML5 with the SpanishTax Agency
>
> ... etc
>
> Just my two cents.
> Pedro
>
>   ____________________________________
>
>
> -----Mensaje original-----
> De: Felix Sasaki [mailto:fsasaki@w3.org] Enviado el: martes, 26 de 
> febrero de 2013 18:08
> Para: Yves Savourel
> CC: public-multilingualweb-lt@w3.org; 'dave lewis'; 'Clemens Weins'; "''Pedro L. Díez Orzas''"; 'Phil Ritchie'; 'Ankit Srivastava'; 'Arle Lommel'
> Asunto: Re: [All] review draft agenda, preparation call 1 March 1-3 
> p.m. UTC (Friday this week)
>
> Am 26.02.13 18:03, schrieb Yves Savourel:
>>> These two
>>> [
>>> •  Pedro: ITS2.0 Implementation Experience in HTML5 with the 
>>> SpanishTax Agency (WP3, WP4) •  Hans v. Freyberg: Standardization 
>>> for the Multilingual
>>> Web: A Driver of Business Opportunities (WP3)]
>>>
>>> Are focusing on "business value". I thought that your presentation 
>>> and Phil might do the same ... but I'm not sure if that would work for you?
>>> Thoughts from you, Phil or others?
>> Thanks for the pointer Felix.
>>
>> I guess I'm trying to get a sense of the difference between the demos in the morning and those talks in the afternoon. In both cases they seem to be strictly based on the use cases.
>>
>> So those afternoon presentations would be more an outline of the business aspects of the use cases? Aren't we risking to repeat ourselves a bit between the morning and afternoon session?
>>
>> Would it make sense to have longer session for each, that would include the business part and then the demo part as an illustration, and have a few the morning and a few the afternoon? That is instead of having case A demo, case B demo, etc. on the morning and then case A business, case B business in the afternoon, to have: case A business + demo in the morning and case B business + demo in the afternoon.
>>
>> (I'm just thinking aloud... not that we should change anything).
> This is a good thought, Yves. I hadn't the repition aspect in mind.
> Let's see what others think - if there is no disagreement I'd then merge the agenda in just "usage scenario" presentations.
>
> Best,
>
> Felix
>> -yves
>>
>
Received on Wednesday, 27 February 2013 10:15:44 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Sunday, 9 June 2013 00:25:08 UTC