"Proposed Business Plan" document posted as http://www.itscj.ipsj.or.jp/sc34/wg4/archive/sc34-wg4-2011-0220.zip

[MURATA Makoto]

(I hit the return key by mistake.  Let me try again.)

Jim,

A number of DRs have to be processed by teleconferences.
Do you think that none of them should be closed officially and
be closed in F2F meetings only?  I don't think there is enough
time in F2F meetings for that.  Or, do you think that approval of
DCORs publication should be done only in F2F meetings?
Usually, we create reasonable drafts after F2F and approval
happens in teleconferences following F2F meetings.

I have been involved in W3C, OASIS, and IDPF, very heavily.
None of them avoid decisions in teleconferences.  F2F meetings
do have disadvantages.  Some people cannot afford.  Others
are too busy for trips.   WG4 has already decided to reduce
the number of F2F meetings of these reasons.

I am not sure if F2F meetings will always have more active
participation.  I guess that we will miss Alex in the next
F2F (and possibly more).  Are we going to eliminate him
from important decisions?

I have heard some private discussions about assigning
priorities to DRs.  Let me summarize them for further
discussions in WG4.

   Usually, not-so-important DRs (such as missing period) are
   easy to address, and important DRs are hard to
   address.

   Somebody would like DRs to be addressed in the
   FIFO manner, and does not want somebody's important
   DRs to be fast-tracked.

   I have assigned time to those DRs which have proposed solutions.


Regards,
Makoto