RE: Meeting room size estimation

["David W. Morris" <dwm at XPASC.COM>]

You are making the suggestion too hard ... though it might also feed
the scheduling process ... all that is needed to make rooms large enough
is to know how many folks who would attend if there were no conflicts.
Conflicts would reduce the size.

Of course, artful creation of conflicts could also reduce room size
requirements ;-:)

The question could also be stated in a way to focus folks on the notion
of "What WGs are you planning to PREPARE for?" and have a second
category of "What WGs will you lurk in if your schedule permits?" along
with a statement of 'policy' re. giving prepared folks priority.

As an inducement to record intent, the IETF web site could have a
program added which could be used shortly before the IETF to produce
a personal schedule of rooms/events?  Even niftier if the WG agendas
and active drafts lists could be merged such that you could easily
identify and access all the preparatory material before the meeting.

Dave Morris

On Mon, 14 Dec 1998, Tony Hain wrote:

> This sounds easy, but when the exceptions are taken into account (ie: I will
> attend x unless it conflicts with y), the already difficult task of creating
> the agenda gets even harder. The IETF has and will grow to fill its
> container, much like the root ball of a plant. The reason the recent
> problems are becoming more pronounced is we have exhausted the incremental
> spaces and the next size container is a significant leap. It is also
> extremely unlikely that any real work would be accomplished in convention
> center sized rooms, which would lead to more content free presentations than
> we already have.
>