Re: WG Review: Supporting Humanities and the Arts'

jkrey@isi.edu Wed, 03 May 1995 15:47 UTC

Received: from ietf.nri.reston.va.us by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa03994; 3 May 95 11:47 EDT
Received: from CNRI.Reston.VA.US by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa03990; 3 May 95 11:47 EDT
Received: from ietf.cnri.reston.va.us by CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa09479; 3 May 95 11:47 EDT
Received: from ietf.nri.reston.va.us by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa03983; 3 May 95 11:47 EDT
Received: from CNRI.Reston.VA.US by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa03979; 3 May 95 11:47 EDT
Received: from venera.isi.edu by CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa09460; 3 May 95 11:47 EDT
Received: from akamai.isi.edu by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-21) id <AA11215>; Wed, 3 May 1995 08:42:14 -0700
Date: Wed, 3 May 1995 08:43:41 -0700
X-Orig-Sender: iesg-request@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US
Sender: ietf-archive-request@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US
From: jkrey@isi.edu
Posted-Date: Wed, 3 May 1995 08:43:41 -0700
Message-Id: <199505031543.AA12857@akamai.isi.edu>
Received: by akamai.isi.edu (5.65c/4.0.3-4) id <AA12857>; Wed, 3 May 1995 08:43:41 -0700
To: brian@dxcoms.cern.ch
Subject: Re: WG Review: Supporting Humanities and the Arts'
Cc: iesg@isi.edu, iab@isi.edu


In response to the comments so far,

I have talked with more than a few folks about the use of 
the term "share" for this group, as I have been very much 
aware of the IBM user group.  All folks have stated that 
this should not be in conflict or confusion as it is very 
evident what the IBM group's charter is versus this charter.  
There was a similar conflict in the past with Steve Casner's 
WG, etc.

The USV Area of the IETF is a second level service, not
a "first level" end-user specific entity, as has been so 
since its inception.  It provides a forum for ALL levels 
and disciplines of user, not just novice.  This is what makes
the USV area unique.  Like other areas in the IETF, it encourages 
other disciplines/groups to participate (like SNANAU, Printer 
MIB, TSIG (CIPSO), TNSFS, etc.).  

The Internet School Networking WG of the IETF has been such an 
example.  The SHARE WG is following in its path.  These two 
efforts have been recognized in the "user" Internet community 
as being successful in the communication between the "technical"
community and "user" community in networking in general. 

In regards to Brian's comments - your concept of a 
user-oriented forum running parallel to the IETF.  I have 
been approached quite a few times in the last two years by 
folks who would like to see myself and the USV area create an 
Internet "UTF" (User Task Force) and separate.  I do see 
this as an in process evolution that may be considered. 
 
BUT, I still feel it is very important, as the Internet 
focus is changing to a 10million+ user oriented environment, 
for the IETF to pay attention to this aspect and continue to 
recognize it.  I am willing as an AD to continue to manage 
these efforts.

In regards to Mike's comments...in the last round of this
charter, EVERY SINGLE comment that was provided by the IAB or
the IESG was reported (without naming names) to Scott Stoner
at the Danvers IETF.  He is aware of the Digital Library Project 
running out of CNRI and he stated very clearly to me and his 
group that is NOT in parallel or duplicating efforts with the 
endeavors of the Share WG.

Joyce