Re: [ALL] 2nd ftf location/date poll

agreed

i just would like us to think about the distribution of all 5 meetings - 
the kick off and the 4 others while we are scheduling to give us the 
highest liklihood of having most of us have at least one of the 5 
meetings in a place that is convenient and thereby increase the 
liklihood of attendance.
i presume many of us have trouble working to obtain both the time and 
money to attend the meetings so i am just trying to look at the big 
picture early on while there are more options and we have more ability 
to take in the total picture of constraints.

deborah

Uschold, Michael F wrote:

>While I certainly prefer a west coast venue also, I would not want a
>prior decision that makes sense, all other things being equal (to have
>both east and west coast venues), to be applied too strictly when
>specific inequalities and other criteria suggest a 'better' alternative.
>
>Mike
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Deborah L. McGuinness [mailto:dlm@ksl.Stanford.EDU] 
>Sent: Thursday, August 26, 2004 11:59 AM
>To: Guus Schreiber
>Cc: SWBPD list
>Subject: Re: [ALL] 2nd ftf location/date poll
>
>
>i do not know if this would make a difference but ralph mentioned in the
>
>last telecon that he was going to add in the answers that people 
>provided on the email list to the location vote.  (some people responded
>
>to an email request for input but did not vote in the online straw 
>poll).   i thought he might have added them to the vote but  i could not
>
>tell that that happened.
>
>you might just double check if that makes a difference.
>
>also on location, i had understood that we have a priority to distribute
>
>meetings and in particular with respect to the united states,
>i understood our plan would be to have one f2f location on the east 
>coast of the united states and one on the west coast.
>thus if you we choose an east coast location for the next meeting, we 
>should remember that the next us location would be a west coast choice.
>
>please make sure this is factored in when making location proposals.
>just as one last data point  for hosting at stanford, it is simple to 
>get rooms during the summer at almost any time but during the school 
>year, it takes significantly more lead time to get a room.  it is easy 
>to get a room on a weekend however.
>
>thanks,
>Deborah
>
>
>Guus Schreiber wrote:
>
>  
>
>>All.
>>
>>David, Ralph, and I have looked at the results of the ftf poll so far.
>>    
>>
>
>  
>
>>It seems that Japan and West US are not feasible as locations. Ralph 
>>has defined a new poll with just two locations, now with suggested 
>>dates added:
>>
>>  option 1: DC area, 25-26 Oct
>>  option 2: Bristol, Nov 1-2
>>
>>PLEASE NOTE:
>>We are supposed to have 4 face-to-face meetings in the 2 years we are 
>>chartered for. It is likely that the 3rd ftf will be in Boston in 
>>March during the W3C Tech Plenary. This means that if we choose now 
>>for US location, there will be a strong preference to have the 4th ftf
>>    
>>
>
>  
>
>>(Fall 2005) in Europe (and vice versa: if the 2nd ftf is in Europe, we
>>    
>>
>
>  
>
>>are likely to have the 4th ftf in the US).
>>
>>You can find the poll at:
>>  http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35495/2ndf2f-b/
>>
>>A quick reaction is appreciated. If possible, we would like to take a 
>>decision at the next telecon (Sep 2).
>>
>>I'm sending a separate  message on proposed target input for the ftf. 
>>This will give some idea of the topics on the ftf agenda.
>>
>>Guus
>>
>>    
>>
>
>  
>

-- 
 Deborah L. McGuinness 
 Knowledge Systems Laboratory 
 353 Serra Mall
 Gates Computer Science Building, 2A Room 241 
 Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305-9020 
 email: dlm@ksl.stanford.edu
 URL: http://ksl.stanford.edu/people/dlm/index.html 
 (voice) 650 723 9770    (stanford fax) 650 725 5850   (computer fax)  801 705 0941