Re: Last Call: <draft-george-travel-faq-03.txt> (IETF meeting attendees' Frequently Asked (travel) Questions) to Informational RFC

[SM <[e-mail]>]

At 14:58 07-02-2012, The IESG wrote:
>The IESG has received a request from an individual submitter to consider
>the following document:
>- 'IETF meeting attendees' Frequently Asked (travel) Questions'
>   <draft-george-travel-faq-03.txt> as an Informational RFC
>
>The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits
>final comments on this action. Please send substantive comments to the
>[e-mail] mailing lists by 2012-03-06. Exceptionally, comments may be

In Section 1:

   "more efficiently than waiting until someone sends an email to the
    [e-mail] list in the days leading up to the meeting."

The XX is ambiguous.

In Section 2:

   "Therefore, this document is intended to be something that can be
    provided to host event organizers that may not have much familiarity
    with the IETF, so that they have a better sense of the information
    that attendees will find helpful."

The draft is written from am IETF perspective for an IETF audience. 
Does http://wikitravel.org/en/Paris provide answers to some of the 
questions in this draft?

   "In reading this document, one may ask, "why would such a
    technologically advanced and internet-savvy organization need such
    help?  Isn't that why search engines exist?"  And the answer is that
    yes, we can sometimes find what we're looking for with search
    engines, but that results in hundreds of people spending their time
    searching, which is not very efficient.  In addition, despite the"

If hundreds of people spent their time searching, there would have 
been more information on 
http://www.ietf.org/registration/MeetingWiki/wiki/doku.php  Or is it 
not efficient for people to share the information they have found?

The following people have contributed to the ietf83 section:

  Kevin P. Fleming
  Stephanie McCammon
  Amy Vezza
  Iljitsch van Beijnum
  Scott Brim

   "no matter how good online translation is getting, some of the most
    informative sites may be difficult for non-native speakers to"

Is this about informative sites being difficult for non-native 
speakers or for people from a specific part of the world?  I suggest 
that the author seeks feedback from people who use English as a 
second language.

Visa requirements is a one-liner whereas food considerations are 
discussed in several paragraphs.  Section 3.3 is labelled 
International considerations.  The entire document is about 
international considerations.

Regards,
-sm