Longer or more meetings?

[Marc Blanchet]

-- samedi, d=E9cembre 07, 2002 10:51:14 -0500 Margaret Wasserman
<mrw@windriver.com> wrote/a =E9crit:
>=20
> At 10:16 AM 12/7/2002 -0500, Henning Schulzrinne wrote:
>> Other SDOs, such as W3C, rely much more heavily on teleconferences,=20
>> typically weekly. With modern web-based meeting support tools (shared=20
>> whiteboard, shared slide viewing, text chat for questions, etc.), these=20
>> can be fairly effective. They also avoid the "selection by travel
>> budget"  problem that you do not mention below.
>=20
> One heretical thought on the selection by travel budget "problem":  Why
> is it a problem?
>=20
> We've concerned about the lack of "relevance" of our standards, right?
> And how do we measure "relevance"?  It seems that we measure it, mainly,
> by the commercial success and wide deployment of our protocols.
>=20
> If a person/company doesn't have the budget to travel to meetings to
> work on a protocol, what is the chance that they have the resources to
> implement the protocol and/or make it a commercial success?

There are many examples of people that have no travel budget and are very
important contributors. And they are usually much less attached to a
company direction.... And I have one in mind who is a very important
contributor in the wg I'm chairing. Also they are startups that starts with
an idea, a contribution, very small amount of money.=20

There is a balance here, but I have to say that "selection by travel
budget" is a potential problem. I can't however guess if it is a big,
medium or small issue.

Marc.

>=20
> Margaret
>=20