I think it would be very important - as you say - to get a good cross-section of representation in order to have a fair chance of acceptance of any conclusions.
While face-to-face is always best - in theory - I can see that this could present real problems for people in the developing world or in a continent distant from the venue. Nor would I favour one of the annual conferences for similar reasons. This suggests that some sort of on-line meeting would be best. Language is, of course, always an issue too. A middle way would be for a very small number of facilitators to meet first face-to-face in order to guide the subsequent discussion - but NOT to make decisions in advance. I'm not up-to-date with the technology for doing this but I am sure the group has some real experts! I wonder in what countries around the globe these issues are of real significance? -----Original Message----- From: k...@vielevisels [mailto:k...@vielevisels.de] Sent: 15 August 2009 15:01 To: Mike Harris; talk@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re: [english 96%] RE: [OSM-talk] [english 95%] A process for rethinking map features Hi, > Kai - this makes very good sense. But how do we set up a working group? > And I didn't think too much about the set up. Meeting in person would be the easiest way, but then requirements of different countries can't come out of the group itself and have to be accounted for by other sources. But there are enough channels (chat, messanger, ...) to set up a multi-oppinion and multi-country group. > would it - and its findings/recommendations - be acceptable to the > majority of the OSM community? Before setting up a working group, normally a longer discussion is going on with different oppinions (eg. discontinue footway vs. discontinue path). If the group consists of people of different oppinions, chances of acceptance are good. Kai _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
