See also: IRC log
<Alan> "firstname.lastname@example.org" <email@example.com>
<marie> ian: issue are about variable time slots
<marie> 4h30' for breakout time
<marie> 1h for plenary session
<marie> flexibility in reporting
<marie> 7 rooms avail. and 4 slots = 28 sessions
<marie> PC should be empowered to pre-select topics and to get a quarter of avail. rooms
<marie> room logistics - 10mns travel time: http://www.w3.org/wiki/TPAC2012-Planning#Room_logistics
< less than 10mns travel
IJ: Any responses to this?
<marie> mcf: about LTs?
<marie> ij: about new and upcoming stuff
marie: Will those LT slots be used to promote sessions?
francois: Thought it might be
confusing to have LTs about upcoming and new work
... since the sessions may not be on those topics, but it could be useful to set the context for existing discussions
... might give a good overview of what people are talking about
IJ: Jeff will cover ground, too
<Alan> +1 to agenda proposal
<Zakim> Alan, you wanted to ask how many total session we have and are we pre-doing some?
IJ: Which BGs are meeting?
Alan: broadcasters and signage bgs have requested space and are meeting during tpac
<marie> (BGs to do a LT?)
IJ: Other thoughts on outreach? Getting sessions?
MCF: Make available grid near registration so people see sessions and can start putting their own on Monday and Tuesday
Any objections to uniform time slots of 1 hour?
<marie> please uniform
Any support for uniform sessions (of 1 hour)?
<Alan> +1 to uniforms - with lots of ribbons!
Number of pre-selected breakout sessions (proposed 7 of 28).
Confirm reporting suggestions (flexibility, 30-minute sharing slot)
<Alan> which is optional - correct?
<marie> and timed
ac agenda -> https://www.w3.org/2012/10/TPAC/ac-agenda
<chaals> [for the record I am happy with variable timing of sessions]
no resolution yet on that...just asking for support or objections
Can live with uniform sessions?
Can live with variable sessions?
<chaals> [can live with either]
Are you ok using public-techplenary for communications by default in this prog committee?
<Alan> prefer member
mcf: would rather use member-techplenary when we discuss things like topic selection
Note: these particular minutes will be public unless there are objections.
<chaals> [Don't mind if the minutes are public or member - usual trade-off of transparency vs getting enough information on record to be useful applies]
<Alan> OK with these as public
proposed: default to public mailing list. use member list for sensitive discussions. Same with minutes
<jeff> ok with me
proposed: 11am ET, Friday 14 Sep
<Alan> OK by me
I see jeff has a tentative call then
<chaals> [Good practice - end sessions on time. Make sure there is time for summing up - so make people keep discussion short, and use something better than a long-winded explanation of how well the previous speaker expressed the point to say "+1"]
chaals, can you edit directly?
<chaals> [sure, if people are happy with those - or with the idea that we should run the wiki in "open slather" mode]
<chaals> [I think 5 minutes for 100+ people to move from somewhere to somewhere 4 minutes away is underestimating the time required by about 5 minutes]
<tidoust> OK by me as well
charles, ok with 14 sep at 11am ET?
<chaals> [yep, WfM (I'll try to get the time shift right, too)]
<jeff> My 11AM on the 14th looks like a hard conflict
we'll do the exercise of syncing up separately
<scribe> Meeting: TPAC Program Committee