Re: [RPRWG] Presentations for the Austin Meeting
Mike,
I have a couple of questions. How many proposals will there be in front of the working group? Is it two
or four or perhaps a different number? And what is the procedure and purpose of reviewing these
documents. Is it to converge them somehow to one proposal before it moves forward similar to the T&D
document.
Siamack
Mike Takefman wrote:
> Dan,
>
> Obviously it is unfortunate that you, and people from EMEA
> are not able to review the material prior to the meeting.
>
> However, this is a democratic organization and you need
> to get a passing vote to change the proceedures.
> You are certainly free to make the motion again and I
> encourage another debate on the topic.
>
> With regard to voting at this meeting, I believe it is
> reasonable to delay voting until later in the week
> to allow people time to review the documents.
>
> cheers,
>
> mike
>
> > "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" wrote:
> >
> > Hi Mike,
> >
> > Here came my Thursday evening, which is the last day in my working week, and no presentation is
> > yet available on the Web site for the meeting next week. No material from the different teams that
> > announced intentions to work on proposals from San Jose until now is available, with the exception
> > of the T&D team documents. For me, and other people coming from my area this means that we will
> > not see these materials before Monday morning - with the exception of the presentations of the
> > people who did the 'wrong thing' and sent their presentations to the whole list.
> >
> > I tried to make a motion in a previous meeting about presentations being made available in advance
> > for review and examination. Unfortunately, the motion did not make it. I will try to make a case
> > again for providing the material in advance:
> >
> > * There is no reason why a serious technical material cannot be made available one week, or at
> > least three days in advance to a meeting - at least in a preliminary form. (Does anybody
> > really believe that a material prepared at the last moment, sometimes during the flight to a
> > meeting can be solid enough for a serious technical standards work?)
> > * The current system puts an unfair handicap on individuals who already made relatively higher
> > efforts in traveling from remote locations to attend the IEEE meetings
> >
> > The situation seems to me even more serious before this meeting, when we will be required to vote
> > on some important decisions.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Dan
> >
> >
>
> --
> Michael Takefman tak@xxxxxxxxx
> Manager of Engineering, Cisco Systems
> Chair IEEE 802.17 Stds WG
> 2000 Innovation Dr, Ottawa, Canada, K2K 3E8
> voice: 613-271-3399 fax: 613-271-4867
begin:vcard
n:Ayandeh;Siamack
tel;fax:781 271 9988
tel;work:781 276 4192
x-mozilla-html:FALSE
url:www.onexco.com
org:Onex Communications Corporation
adr:;;34 Crosby Drive;Bedford;MA;01730;USA
version:2.1
email;internet:sayandeh@xxxxxxxxxx
title:Senior Consulting Engineer
end:vcard