Re: Workshop and meeting requirements

About what Chris said,

Le 13 mai 2014 à 05:50, Chris Wilson <cwilso@google.com> a écrit :
> Put it this way - let's say Tantek and I decided we wanted to make a "Moving the W3C Forward" open-ended unconference happen. 

Exactly.

It would be interesting to dig in the process discussion archives and staff mailing-list archives. I have a hunch that the W3C Workshop requirements comes from:

1. Organizing meetings
2. Noticing some mistakes, errors, complaints
3. Creating a list of good guidelines on organizing good meetings.
4. Having still some bumps along the road
5. One day thinking hmm that's a good way to start a WG.
6. Let's make it into the process document.

(insert here my wish for more annotated version of the process document ^_^ )

Anyway, let's rewind a bit. 

We want people to be able to 

* meet spontaneously 
* solve issues together

The W3C Workshop Process comes too often with the "burden" of "We might need to create a WG and/or activity". It should not be. And in many cases completely unrelated as Chris said above or Daniel about the name. At Mozilla, the meetings about a specific area, issues needing coordination are often call "work week", open to contributors.

We are very productive as you can see.
https://wiki.mozilla.org/images/1/16/Catsworking.gif


The issues need to be articulated around the notion of time, number of participants, key people (subjective). Travel requirements, availability, etc. Organizing an event for 10 persons does not require a lot of efforts (depending on where are located the persons). Managers approval dance, Tickets booking (last minutes are expensive), visa requirements, periods of time when hotels are more expensive, etc., 

So what I could see for events organization is more guidelines than requirements.
Not perfect but similar to this discussion 
https://wiki.mozilla.org/Work_Week



-- 
Karl Dubost 🐄
http://www.la-grange.net/karl/

Received on Tuesday, 13 May 2014 04:24:17 UTC