Subject: Re: IPP> ADM - Requirements for TXT format documentation

From: Don Wright <[email-masked]>
Date: 15 Apr 97 12:09:20 EDT

We discussed this before and came to the conclusion
that the only fair method was for participants in the conference
calls to pick up their share of the cost.  Participants in the
development of IETF standards are expected to pay their
own way to attend WG meetings, the IETF Plenary, etc.
and conference calls are just one of those expenses.

That said, if someone wants to start setting up the conference
calls and provide an 800 number for participants then great!

Don

To: ipp%pwg.org @ interlock.lexmark.com @ SMTP
cc:  (bcc: Don Wright)
From: rdebry%us.ibm.com @ interlock.lexmark.com (Roger K Debry) @ SMTP
Date: 04/15/97 11:59:13 AM
Subject: IPP> ADM - Requirements for TXT format documentation

Classification:
Prologue:
Epilogue: Roger K deBry
Senior Techncial Staff Member
Architecture and Technology
IBM Printing Systems
email: [email-masked]
phone: 1-303-924-4080

An additional item we discussed previously, but have not implemented, was to
arrange
to have an 800 number available for the IPP calls.  At least one person has
expressed
an inability to participate in these calls because of the costs.

---------------------- Forwarded by Roger K Debry/Boulder/IBM on 04/15/97 09:53
AM ---------------------------

        ipp-owner @ pwg.org
        04/13/97 02:21 PM

To: ipp @ pwg.org@internet
cc:
Subject: IPP> ADM - Requirements for TXT format documentation

Hi,

one of the comments I got from our Area Directors during the meeting last
week was that we are still not following the intent from the IETF to have a
fully open dialogue of what is happening in the project.

There are two things that we need to improve on right away to put this right:

1) We should try to make our utmost to always provide a TXT version of
agendas, minutes, contributions and drafts.  This should also include what
we show on the Web server. Although it is not mandatory to have a Web
server for the project, it is expected that people can download documents
in TXT format if you have one.  I have given Jeff instructions to that
effect, so that our already existing FTP documents in TXT format are
included.  For our phone conferences etc. we will still need to keep the
PDF document formats as well.

2) We were critizised for not keeping people in the IETF informed about our
progress (there seems to be a bit of question mark here about how much you
are supposed to show before you are a WG, but now that we are one there are
no doubts).  We need to start publishing our intermediate drafts of the
formal documents, in TXT format, over the formal IETF Internet-Draft
library.  We also need to bring all our I-D documents up to a point where
the content is reasonably complete and consistent, even if they are still
under discussion. It seems that we still have some general editorial work
to do here.

Regards,

Carl-Uno

Carl-Uno Manros
Principal Engineer - Advanced Printing Standards - Xerox Corporation
701 S. Aviation Blvd., El Segundo, CA, M/S: ESAE-231
Phone +1-310-333 8273, Fax +1-310-333 5514
Email: [email-masked]

---

From: Keith Moore <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 1997 14:51:44 -0400

> and conference calls are just one of those expenses.

While I agree about the general principle of cost sharing, the number
of conference calls, and the number of face-to-face meetings that this
WG has (aside from IETF meetings) are indeed a subject of concern.

IETF has traditionally done the bulk of its work by electronic mail.
Granted, mailing lists aren't as effective as either face-to-face or
conference calls, but they're cheap and accessible at reasonable cost
by pretty much everyone.

The IPP WG is doing a number of things differently than the
traditional IETF way.  But IETF current practices are neither sacred
nor carved in stone, and we should reconsider them from time to time.

So I'm currently thinking of the IPP WG's practices that vary from
IETF as "experimental".  Rather than scrutinize each one and decide
whether it is consistent with IETF goals -- I'd prefer to see how well
they work and get feedback from participants.

To that end, I'm interested in feedback (via private mail!) from WG
participants -- regarding whether the frequent face-to-face meetings
and conference calls help the working group acheive its goals, and
whether they impose a significant barrier to open participation.

(I've put the APPS ADs' addresses in the reply-to field, since I
expect Harald will also be interested in such feedback.)

Keith Moore