San Diego Agenda issues

["Adrian Farrel" <adrian@olddog.co.uk>]

All,

At the risk of seeming petulant...

You CANNOT [RFC2119] have both all drafts discussed and a reasonable length discussion on
any draft.

After Seoul we were told in the strongest terms by WG participants and by the ADs that we
MUST facilitate discussion at the face-to-face meeting. Thirty five-minute slots may fill
the time, but will achieve nothing.

We have made a draft agenda which is now full. We completely understand that the work that
you are doing in your drafts is more important than anything anyone in the world is doing
at the moment, but we do not understand how you propose to cover your drafts on the agenda
as it now stands.

Of course, the chairs are only your humble servants, and if it is the will of the WG to
change the agenda that is fine with us so long as:
- it fits within the priorities and milestones in the charter
- it conforms to the requirements passed to us by the ADs
- we do not end up with tiny slots and no discussion on any draft

So, ask yourselves:
- why does my draft need discussion in SD?
- why can't the discussion be on the list?
- what will I recommend to be axed from the agenda?

It may be of interest that to you to know that the ADs issued some guiding principles:
- don't discuss any 00 draft that was only published a short time before the meeting
- don't discuss any draft that has not had discussion on the list
- only discuss drafts where there are open issues
- build the foundations first
- prioritise charter work above other work
- prioritise meeting the milestones above other charter work

Thanks,
Adrian