Re: a proposal to be subitted to teh ITU-T TSAG

[Leslie Daigle <leslie@thinkingcat.com>]

I can tell you a bit about my experiences in the analogous
W3C coordination group:  mostly #1; occasionally #2 (when
one side or other gets steamed about something); we've
used the coordination group to push back strenuously on
#3 (told Tim Berners-Lee that he didn't get to veto URI
new URI schemes in the IETF).

In the W3C case, the utility has been having the venue
to have discussions, instead of lobbing liaison missives for
everything, or letting things fall through the cracks (err, the
latter is a theory, anyway...).

Leslie.

Geoff Huston wrote:
> I'm with you a little better as to the general intent, namely to
>
> - avoid 'joint' document production
>
> but the second is still looking to me a bit like a furry hairball So I'm 
> trying to understand what it means to have "a way to collaborate when it 
> makes senss"
>
> Is where we are heading with this form of collaboration ...
>
> 1:   "you do the work and we'll encourage our folk to sign up to your 
> working group" (light weight)
>
> or
>
> 2: "we'll formally comment on your draft from time to time and we expect 
> our comments to be integrated into the document" (mid weight)
>
> or
>
> 3: "we must to be consulted before you approve and if we say 'no' then 
> it means 'no" (heavy weight)
>
> or
>
> 4: dunno yet (indeterminate weight!)
>
> cheers,
>
>      Geoff


--

-------------------------------------------------------------------
"Reality:
    Yours to discover."
                               -- ThinkingCat
Leslie Daigle
leslie@thinkingcat.com
-------------------------------------------------------------------