[rgchairs] Re: 65th IETF - WG/RG/BOF Scheduling

Henrik Levkowetz <henrik@levkowetz.com> Sat, 28 January 2006 18:57 UTC

Received: from localhost.cnri.reston.va.us ([] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1F2vGP-0003sw-3I; Sat, 28 Jan 2006 13:57:33 -0500
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1Eytrz-0002YW-ND for rgchairs@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 17 Jan 2006 11:39:43 -0500
Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx []) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA29271 for <rgchairs@irtf.org>; Tue, 17 Jan 2006 11:38:19 -0500 (EST)
Received: from av9-1-sn3.vrr.skanova.net ([]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Eyu08-0006mf-E7 for rgchairs@irtf.org; Tue, 17 Jan 2006 11:48:09 -0500
Received: by av9-1-sn3.vrr.skanova.net (Postfix, from userid 502) id 1E8773815D; Tue, 17 Jan 2006 17:39:32 +0100 (CET)
Received: from smtp3-2-sn3.vrr.skanova.net (smtp3-2-sn3.vrr.skanova.net []) by av9-1-sn3.vrr.skanova.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id D92EC37EC1; Tue, 17 Jan 2006 17:39:31 +0100 (CET)
Received: from shiraz.levkowetz.com (81-224-201-50-no45.tbcn.telia.com []) by smtp3-2-sn3.vrr.skanova.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id C3B5237E92; Tue, 17 Jan 2006 17:39:31 +0100 (CET)
Received: from localhost ([]) by shiraz.levkowetz.com with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from <henrik@levkowetz.com>) id 1Eytrn-00074a-20; Tue, 17 Jan 2006 17:39:31 +0100
Message-ID: <43CD1DC0.90500@levkowetz.com>
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 17:39:28 +0100
From: Henrik Levkowetz <henrik@levkowetz.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.7 (Macintosh/20050923)
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Allison Mankin <mankin@psg.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: henrik@levkowetz.com
X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on shiraz.levkowetz.com); SAEximRunCond expanded to false
X-Spam-Score: 0.1 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 5a9a1bd6c2d06a21d748b7d0070ddcb8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 13:57:29 -0500
Cc: wgchairs@ietf.org, rgchairs@irtf.org, bofchairs@ietf.org, Tools Team Discussion <tools-discuss@ietf.org>
Subject: [rgchairs] Re: 65th IETF - WG/RG/BOF Scheduling
X-BeenThere: rgchairs@lists.ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: IRTF research group chairs list <rgchairs.lists.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rgchairs>, <mailto:rgchairs-request@lists.ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/rgchairs>
List-Post: <mailto:rgchairs@lists.ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rgchairs-request@lists.ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rgchairs>, <mailto:rgchairs-request@lists.ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: rgchairs-bounces@lists.ietf.org
Errors-To: rgchairs-bounces@lists.ietf.org

Hi Allison, 

on 2006-01-17 17:09 Allison Mankin said the following:
> Hi, Henrik,
> I've taken agenda@ietf.org off the cc list so we don't keep generating
> tickets for them while we discuss the tool design.  Or should we move
> to tools-discuss?  I think this mail will get to the tool developer.

Immediately when I got the response from agenda@ietf.org I thought
'Oh, dear, I should have taken them off the list..."  But we can add

>> Also, I have lists of conflicts from previous years, which I use as a
>> base for the request this time.  I'd love to be able to just type
>> in the list, but the tool forces me to use the drop-down list.  A bit
>> awkward.
> The purpose of this tool (I understand) is so that simple initial machine
> processing can be done on the WG chairs' scheduling inputs, before the
> human brain (the brilliant Marcia!) NP-complete effort of making the 
> actual schedule.
> Having seen a lot of the Chairs' unstructured requests, I know they are
> very varied, even to the form of the lists for conflict avoidance:
> misspellings, shorter names than the real short names, SIP/PING
> instead of both names, descriptive terms.  It's understandable
> but hard to use.

Yes, understood, and I would expect exactly this filtering to be done
by the request tool - but that can be done by validating the manually
entered list by a javascript snippet before submission, or by a server-
side script on submission; and in both case returning the user to the
original form for correction of his/her input.  Doing things the current
way makes life easier on Marcia, which I absolutely support, but it makes
the task harder than necessary on the chairs.

The tool author is already using javascript for various tasks in the
form, so moving to a pre-submit validation model instead of a constrained
entry model shouldn't be impossible.

> What I'm wondering is whether at IETF 65, the session will come
> up pre-configured with the previous conflict list, and allow the chairs
> to edit that...

Sounds like a good idea - and that would also work better with a
pre-submission validation, instead of the current constrained entry :-)

>> The tool forces me to skip that and list first-priority conflicts
>> before I may list second-priority conflicts.  Is that necessary?
> I agree, you should not have to do this.   Something for the fix list, IMO.



Rgchairs mailing list