Re: [dispatch] DISPATCH agenda @ IETF-104

[Mary Barnes <[e-mail]>]

I'm not debating some of your points, which are very good when it comes to
building an agenda.   If I post the agenda ahead of time, next time I will
include a link to the wiki and just cut and paste from there into the body
of the email.  While your time estimate on the agenda is probably about
right, it takes me much longer than that to go dig up threads and figure
out what documents we are talking about and make sure I'm not missing
anything.   And, I have the same problem finding drafts, as well, which is
why I'm suggesting the -dispatch so they'll easily show up on the WG page -
that lets me double check I haven't missed anything.  Per discussion
yesterday, it's not clear that the contributors/authors can indicate
replaces for their own drafts. That may be a chair only option?   In which
case, I think there is the need for a tool enhancement.   And the same with
having the ability to have a wiki in the datatracker as opposed to tools
page.

The latter brings up another question for Cullen as to whether earlier
versions of drafts that have never been adopted, and thus fall out of the
datatracker when they expire, are relevant?  I would think absolutely so as
they document prior art.  But, I honestly don't know the official status of
the tools pages when it comes to the legal aspects. So, that is a general
question - if we answer it for the drafts, then it should equally apply to
the wiki.

As an aside, the datatracker does point to the Tools page for each WG and
once there, it's one click to get to a wiki.  So, I don't think it's super
hidden.

And, of course, this whole discussion is more general.  Per my email
yesterday it gets into tracking/documenting history in general, which also
relates to Cullen's point.   Although, it's a very curious one to be having
in the DISPATCH WG since it's been around for 10 years.

Regards,
Mary.

On Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 10:44 AM Martin Thomson <[e-mail]> wrote:

> Cullen's points are valid here, but I was making a simple request for
> courtesy and respect.
>
> If the critical information is in an email, it is more readily available.
> That's a tiny bit more work to provide, but a great help to people looking
> to prepare for the meeting.  The TLS agenda, for example, was very helpful.
>
> For instance, I had real trouble finding Bron's post until I went to the
> wiki.  I started to look for a draft, draft-gondwana-*, draft-*-jmap-*,
> draft-jenkins-*, no luck. I searched my mail for emails, I got none because
> the email had a misspelled title, and the journey to find the wiki on a
> phone is distressingly long and the site agonizingly slow.  The direct
> link, once I had it, was fine, of course.
>
> None of this is terribly hard to deal with, but it's a bit of burden.
> It's possible that it is harder for me because I have inbuilt expectations
> about how people present their ideas.
>
> I wonder if there is a tools enhancement we might have: the ability to
> build an agenda based on drafts (and uploaded slides).  Manually building
> all that stuff only takes 10 minutes, but I'll bet that it could be cut
> down to 2 minutes for most groups, and produce a more usable product.
>
> --Martin
>
> p.s., I don't think anyone was asking you not to use the wiki.  Though
> Cullen is right that all the stuff that happens out of sight without a good
> record is not good.
>
> On Fri, Mar 22, 2019, at 02:18, Mary Barnes wrote:
> > So, where do you propose we store all this information for archival?
> >
> > This really comes down to an earlier discussion on one of the other
> > general lists that a lot of history is lost. That wiki is the history
> > of what happened to all the work items since we started DISPATCH. Yes,
> > we have minutes, etc. but that doesn't give you the complete picture as
> > a lot of things happen actually NOT on public lists - e.g., the AD
> > sponsored documents go off and discussions are between AD and authors,
> > when WGs are chartered, there's a lot of out of band discussion, etc.
> > Do you propose that all those discussions happen on the mailing list
> > for archival?
> >
> > Can we add a page to the datatracker for each WG so that we can store
> > information like this? The only other thing I can think of is that we
> > just post it periodically on the mailing list if you want guaranteed
> > archival.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Mary.
> >
> > On Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 10:00 AM Cullen Jennings <[e-mail]> wrote:
> > >
> > >  I’m reading this on a plane and don’t have access to the WIKI, and 10
> years from now when I am trying to find prior are for a patent trial, all
> the content of the Wiki will not be archived.
> > >
> > >
> > >  > On Mar 19, 2019, at 4:35 PM, Martin Thomson <[e-mail]>
> wrote:
> > >  >
> > >  > I agree with Martin. I don't know how to find these documents.
> Where is the wiki?
> > >  >
> > >  > The URL is the answer.
> > >  >
> > >  > On Thu, Mar 14, 2019, at 16:16, Martin J. Dürst wrote:
> > >  >> Hello everybody,
> > >  >>
> > >  >> On 2019/03/14 02:13, Mary Barnes wrote:
> > >  >>> Hi all,
> > >  >>>
> > >  >>> We have uploaded a preliminary agenda for DISPATCH:
> > >  >>
> > >  >> Thanks for putting this together.
> > >  >>
> > >  >>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/materials/
> > >  >>
> > >  >> This may be just an oversight, but in general, I very much prefer
> to
> > >  >> have the agenda (and other, similarly short stuff) inline in my
> inbox.
> > >  >> That saves me (and everybody else) a click (or two, plus some
> on-page
> > >  >> search time, this time). Of course it can change later, but we all
> know
> > >  >> that.
> > >  >>
> > >  >> The actual agenda is at
> > >  >>
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/104/materials/agenda-104-dispatch-00.
>
> > >  >> In the future, precise links would be appreciated.
> > >  >>
> > >  >> The agenda currently reads as follows:
> > >  >>
> > >  >> # Draft Agenda Dispatch @IETF-104 - v1
> > >  >>
> > >  >> DISPATCH Meeting
> > >  >> -------------------
> > >  >>
> > >  >> # Status and agenda bash - Chairs (10 min)
> > >  >>
> > >  >> # Relay User Machine (RUM) - Brian Rosen (20 min)
> > >  >>
> > >  >> # JSON Contact - Bron Gondwana (20 min)
> > >  >>
> > >  >> # Web Packaging - Jeffrey Yasskin (20 min)
> > >  >>
> > >  >> Note: see DISPATCH wiki for additional links to materials
> > >  >>
> > >  >>
> > >  >> ART AREA Meeting
> > >  >> -------------------
> > >  >>
> > >  >> # Bofs and meetings of interest - ADs (5 min)
> > >  >>
> > >  >> # JSON Canonicalization Scheme (JCS) - Anders Rundgren (20)
> > >  >> Document: draft-rundgren-json-canonicalization-scheme
> > >  >>
> > >  >> # AOB
> > >  >>
> > >  >>
> > >  >>> Regards,
> > >  >>> Mary.
> > >  >>> DISPATCH WG co-chair
> > >  >>>
> > >  >>> ---------- Forwarded message ---------
> > >  >>> From: Mary Barnes <[e-mail]>
> > >  >>> Date: Thu, Mar 7, 2019 at 9:59 AM
> > >  >>> Subject: Topics for DISPATCH @ IETF-104
> > >  >>> To: DISPATCH <[e-mail]>
> > >  >>> Cc: ART ADs <[e-mail]>, dispatch chairs <
> [e-mail]>
> > >  >>>
> > >  >>>
> > >  >>> Hi all,
> > >  >>>
> > >  >>> The wiki has been updated with the topics that have been agreed
> to be
> > >  >>> discussed at IETF-104:
> https://trac.ietf.org/trac/dispatch/wiki/WikiStart
> > >  >>>
> > >  >>> The proposal for moving forward draft-dold-payto is still being
> discussed
> > >  >>> amongst ADS/chairs as is the JSON Canonicalization that had been
> proposed
> > >  >>> as a BoF in the SEC Area, but was not approved.
> > >  >>>
> > >  >>> We will post any updates to the wiki and will post an agenda
> shortly.
> > >  >>>
> > >  >>> As a reminder, if you are submitting drafts for discussion in the
> dispatch
> > >  >>> working group following the standard convention of including the
> WG name in
> > >  >>> the draft name (i.e., draft-<name>-dispatch-blah-blah) makes it
> *much*
> > >  >>> easier for me as chair to make sure I have the right documents
> identified
> > >  >>> on the wiki and on the agenda. The tool will allow you to
> indicate that
> > >  >>> the document with the new name replaces the document with the old
> name if
> > >  >>> that's a concern.
> > >  >>>
> > >  >>> Regards,
> > >  >>> Mary
> > >  >>> DISPATCH WG co-chair
> > >  >>>
> > >  >> _______________________________________________
> > >  >> dispatch mailing list
> > >  >> [e-mail]
> > >  >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dispatch
> > >  >>
> > >  >
> > >  > _______________________________________________
> > >  > dispatch mailing list
> > >  > [e-mail]
> > >  > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dispatch
> > >
> > >  _______________________________________________
> > >  dispatch mailing list
> > > [e-mail]
> > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dispatch
>