On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 5:56 PM, Pete Resnick <presn...@qti.qualcomm.com> wrote: ... > chair needs to (with the help of minutes takers and other participants) post > detailed notes of the discussion to the list and ask for objections. That > serves two functions: (a) It makes a record of work that was done; and (b) > it gives people who don't attend meetings (including new folks who come > along) a chance to participate and voice their concerns. *Achievement* of > consensus might have to occur f2f for some issues in some WGs, but it seems > to me that *assessment* of consensus must be completely possible on the > list, even if the only poster to the list is the chair with all of the f2f > notes.
What I would prefer to see is that in addition to minutes there be separate messages posted to the list for each document, detailing the discussion of that document in the meeting and the changes that will result from the discussion. That can be posted by the chair, but I'd really expect it to come from a document editor. That makes sure that everyone can see what the document editor heard and intends to do with the document, and allows the working group to continue the discussion or say, "Yes, that's what we heard as well, and it's fine." And I think that should be posted as soon after the meeting session as possible. It should definitely not wait for the document updates to be done, perhaps weeks later, after everyone who was there has forgotten the details. I think I have a topic to discuss at the App chairs lunch in Orlando. :-) Barry
