W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-w3process@w3.org > May 2014

Re: Workshop and meeting requirements

From: Marcos <marcos@marcosc.com>
Date: Fri, 16 May 2014 10:22:16 -0400
To: David Singer <singer@mac.com>, Sylvain Galineau <galineau@adobe.com>
Cc: Chris Wilson <cwilso@google.com>, "public-w3process@w3.org" <public-w3process@w3.org>, "Michael Champion (MS OPEN TECH)" <michael.champion@microsoft.com>
Message-ID: <etPan.53761f18.79e2a9e3.1869c@Marcoss-MacBook-Pro.local>


On May 16, 2014 at 10:11:58 AM, Sylvain Galineau (galineau@adobe.com) wrote:
> > I do not think it is fair to dismiss video by comparing some ideal  
> utopian solution with the worst possible alternative, especially  
> when the latter, as described, is in fact significantly worse  
> than what is routinely used by many of us today. I routinely attend  
> remote presentations using software that lets me see the speaker's  
> slides or desktop on most of my screen, video in the corner and  
> a chat area allowing me to interact with everyone in the room.  
> It works very well, even with audiences spread across remote  
> locations. This would at the very least suggest a wide spectrum  
> of possible options and outcomes.


I agree with Sylvain. I also regularly "attend" conferences remotely and really appreciate live video (even when it's one way). I also know that when we ran the RICG's meet-up the video feed we provided was hugely appreciated by the community and quite a few people logged in to watch (despite us having some technical issues initially, and despite many people having to get up at 4am!). Again, even though the video feed was one-way, it still spawned a great deal of real time discussion in IRC.  

-- 
Marcos Caceres
Received on Friday, 16 May 2014 14:22:49 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:35:10 UTC