Re: shapes-ISSUE-50 (presentation requirements): Presentations to the working group

Hash: SHA256


I do not think that creating an issue for this issue is heavy-weight at all.
 Just sending out an email could have resulted in no action at all.

I got less out of the VF2F than I would have if all the presentations had
been available beforehand.  I feel that future WG meetings would go better
if presentation materials could be looked over by WG members before the
actual presentation.

There is a trade-off between getting the best possible presentations and
requiring the presentations to be available earlier.  However, WG meeting
time is a very valuable resource and I think that it would be better used if
WG members could do more preparation.


On 05/21/2015 03:18 PM, Arnaud Le Hors wrote:
> Hi Peter,
> I agree with you that it is preferable to have meeting material be
> shared prior to the meetings but I don't think it's reasonable to make
> this an absolute requirement.
> While I didn't expect Jose to have put together a presentation and I
> grant you that it wasn't easy to get all the details in such a quick run
> through I still think we were better off with the slides than without and
> I don't think it was a waste of time. I'm thankful to Jose for having
> taken the time to put these together to try and help us move forward on
> the test suite.
> As for the rest, I agree with you but would point out that the link to
> Jose's slides is in the log and will therefore be in the minutes. That
> should be enough from a recording point of view. If anyone wants to add
> it to the wiki more prominently they can certainly do that. I'd say it's
> a good practice to add this type of links to the agenda in the
> appropriate location when they are used in a meeting.
> Overall, I'm rather surprised you think this is worth creating a formal
> issue in tracker. The overhead this implies is quite significant for
> something that, in my opinion, merely amounts to establishing good
> practices. I would hope that this email exchange would suffice. -- Arnaud
> Le Hors - Senior Technical Staff Member, Open Web Technologies - IBM 
> Software Group
> "RDF Data Shapes Working Group Issue Tracker" <>
> wrote on 05/21/2015 06:53:21 AM:
>> From: "RDF Data Shapes Working Group Issue Tracker"
>> <> To: Date:
>> 05/21/2015 06:53 AM Subject: shapes-ISSUE-50 (presentation
>> requirements): Presentations to the working group
>> shapes-ISSUE-50 (presentation requirements): Presentations to the 
>> working group
>> Raised by: Peter Patel-Schneider On product:
>> Presentations to the working group are not as efficient as they should
>> be, wasting considerable meeting time.
>> There should be some requirements on presentations.  I propose the 
>> following minimal requirements: 1/ Presentation documents are made
>> available for perusal beforehand, allowing adequate time for working
>> group members to read and understand them before their presentation. 2/
>> The status of presentation documents is announced to the working group
>> when they are made available and when they are significantly updated. 
>> 3/ Presentation documents are linked to from the WG wiki and remain 
>> available for the life of the working group, possibly in an edited or
>> updated form.
Version: GnuPG v2


Received on Thursday, 21 May 2015 23:12:23 UTC