Re: [Mtgvenue] IETF: Mtg Venue Doc

"John Dickinson" <jad@sinodun.com> Sun, 12 February 2017 14:40 UTC

Return-Path: <jad@sinodun.com>
X-Original-To: mtgvenue@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mtgvenue@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 742E612946A for <mtgvenue@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 12 Feb 2017 06:40:20 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id pGqNfItB89wt for <mtgvenue@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 12 Feb 2017 06:40:19 -0800 (PST)
Received: from haggis.mythic-beasts.com (haggis.mythic-beasts.com [IPv6:2a00:1098:0:86:1000:0:2:1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D6CB5129527 for <mtgvenue@ietf.org>; Sun, 12 Feb 2017 06:40:18 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [2001:b98:204:102:fffa::498b] (port=56328 helo=[192.168.12.13]) by haggis.mythic-beasts.com with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA256:256) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <jad@sinodun.com>) id 1ccvK3-00057p-RE; Sun, 12 Feb 2017 14:40:17 +0000
From: John Dickinson <jad@sinodun.com>
To: mtgvenue@ietf.org, Laura Nugent <lnugent@amsl.com>
Date: Sun, 12 Feb 2017 14:39:48 +0000
Message-ID: <85A2BA21-CA07-4B54-8946-A11F47697CC1@sinodun.com>
In-Reply-To: <F0DECF50-5AB9-4073-A051-4AF326A1FB34@fugue.com>
References: <A739489D-BAF5-4B4A-855A-5C63BD339F16@amsl.com> <F0DECF50-5AB9-4073-A051-4AF326A1FB34@fugue.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=_MailMate_CBF3D0FF-1339-4B33-AE65-6E92A2C1F7E8_="; micalg="pgp-sha512"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
X-Mailer: MailMate (1.9.6r5344)
X-BlackCat-Spam-Score: -28
X-Mythic-Debug: State = no_sa; Score =
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mtgvenue/ZJq2desZrMBRyMkEqB51MnyhyrU>
Subject: Re: [Mtgvenue] IETF: Mtg Venue Doc
X-BeenThere: mtgvenue@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: "List for email discussion of the IAOC meeting venue selection process." <mtgvenue.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/mtgvenue>, <mailto:mtgvenue-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/mtgvenue/>
List-Post: <mailto:mtgvenue@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:mtgvenue-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mtgvenue>, <mailto:mtgvenue-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 12 Feb 2017 14:40:20 -0000

On 11 Feb 2017, at 1:09, Ted Lemon wrote:

> On Feb 10, 2017, at 2:20 PM, Laura Nugent <lnugent@amsl.com> wrote:
>> 2.  Criteria -  There are a number of items included as criteria that I would eliminate or modify for a variety of reasons, explained below:
>> 	a.  "Available travel issue assessments…"  I believe this should be eliminated as it is not a criteria but part of a process.
>>
>> 	b.  "The facility permits easy wheelchair access”
>> 	c.  “The Facility is accessible by people with disabilities”
>> 	d.  “The IETF Hotel(s) permit easy wheelchair access”	
>> 	e.  “The IETF Hotel(s) are accessible by people with disabilities”
>> There are laws which govern accommodations for disabilities, which laws vary from location to location.  We are legally bound to comply with local disability laws.  Singling out these four items is misleading, in my mind, as it appears to limit our obligation and to exclude some disabilities.  I suggest, in place of these four items, we instead borrow the introductory text as the criteria to govern this concern:
>> 	“Facilities selected for IETF meetings conform with local health, safety and accessibility laws and regulations.”
>
> The problem with this is that what we want is to make sure that if local regulations do not require the accommodations described in the document, that we check to see if such accommodations are present; if not, that venue is disqualified.
>

Exactly, IMHO relying on the “local health, safety and accessibility laws and regulations” is just not good enough. If they do not meet the standards required by the IETF participants (as a whole, not just me) as set out in this (or some other) document then we should consider if this is a country/city that we want to go to.

regards
John

John Dickinson

http://sinodun.com

Sinodun Internet Technologies Ltd.
Magdalen Centre
Oxford Science Park
Robert Robinson Avenue
Oxford OX4 4GA
U.K.