2.8.3 Web Elucidation of Internet-Related Developments (weird)

NOTE: This charter is a snapshot of the 46th IETF Meeting in Washington, DC. It may now be out-of-date. Last Modified: 29-Sep-99


Christopher Burke <ccb007@NAmerica.mot.com>

User Services Area Director(s):

April Marine <april_marine@iengines.net>

User Services Area Advisor:

April Marine <april_marine@iengines.net>

Mailing Lists:

General Discussion:ietf-weird@imc.org
To Subscribe: ietf-weird-request@imc.org
In Body: subscribe
Archive: http://www.imc.org/ietf-weird/

Description of Working Group:

The WEIRD working group will develop a set of web pages. The target audience is people new to the IETF and other Internet generalists. Content within the scope of the group includes: current IETF WG and BOF activities, dependencies and interrelationships among specific IETF WG and BOF activities, BOF historical information, IAB / IESG / Secretariat issues and topics of interest and their impact.

Content specifically out of scope includes: information interpreting trends in Internet engineering and standards; IETF-related information that is editorial in nature.

It is thought that by starting with concrete information of general interest related to a topic the WG knows well (IETF activities), the concept of doing web pages would be well-tested. Future evaluations of the process could address the question of re-examining the audience or content scope.

Web content will be developed in collaboration with the IETF Secretariat using a mix of new material and material from existing Web pages and FYI documents. Information will be presented in an online format suitable for the casual Internet user, combining text and illustration.

In order to create a historic archive of the online data and to make it more accessible to users who may have difficulty with online access, the working group will capture at least one snapshot of the web pages and publish it as an FYI RFC.

Goals and Milestones:

May 99


Finalize outline for pages and prioritize sections

Jul 99


Formally solicit feedback regarding progress to date

Jul 99


Review progress, outline and prioritization of tasks and

Nov 99


Formally solicit feedback regarding progress to date

Nov 99


Review outline and prioritization of tasks and revise if necessary

Feb 00


Create hardcopy version and submit as Internet-Draft

Mar 00


Submit hardcopy version for RFC publication

Jul 00


Review progress and make decision to disband or re-charter

No Current Internet-Drafts
No Request For Comments

Current Meeting Report

Minutes of the Web Elucidation of Internet-Related Developments (WEIRD) Working Group
IETF - Washington, DC November 1999

Recorded by April Marine. Chair is Chris Burke.

The WEIRD WG met on Thursday, November 11 1999. The agenda looked like this:


1. Welcome / circulate sign-up sheet sheet
2. Review of Progress on Action Items from IETF 45
3. Discussion of relationship of WEIRD to proposed ICANN Ad Hoc / draft any resolution if the group desires it.
4. Assign new action items.
5. Adjourn

Accompanying these minutes are the slides Chris used during the meeting. The latter several slides are really notes taken during the meeting to capture the discussion that happened as part of item #4 on the agenda and carry more detail than these minutes.

1. Welcome / circulate sign-up sheet sheet

Chris welcomed the group and gave the usual introductory info regarding the mailing list and location of web information, as well as a very quick recap of the Charter of group so everyone understood the goals.

2. Review of Progress on Action Items from IETF 45

We then went through the pending action items and noticed the status of each.

Quick and Dirty links

Area Director's Overview

Hot Topics

Core Web Design Team

2nd Level Domain Name (really it's a Third Level name :-)

Other/related progress:

3. Discussion of relationship of WEIRD to proposed ICANN Ad Hoc / draft any resolution if the group desires it.

Chris reviewed what the ICANN Ad Hoc committee was and noted that, from their stated goals, they could be construed as overlapping with WEIRD. Given that, he wondered if it was worthwhile for the WG to form a liaison relationship with the Ad Hoc committee, on the model of USWG and TERENA. The consensus of the group was the Ad Hoc committee was in fact doing quite different sorts of work and that a liaison right now would not be the best choice.

4. Assign new action items.

The group then got into a discussion of new action items, which really turned out to be a general discussion of how best to proceed next. It was agreed that developing a couple of templates to aid in gathering input would be wise (so as to leave the info we needed less open-ended and therefore hopefully people would be more inclined to provide it).

The types of templates agreed on preliminarily:

It was agreed that we didn't just want to list "what" but also "why." For example, not just what BOF was happening, but why was it added to the agenda? What was the motivation for it?

The group then decided to try to flesh out one of the templates and chose the Hot Topics template. Many concrete suggestions were provided and a template draft will be circulated to the list soon.

The template discussion led naturally to a discussion of the process of getting all this done. That discussion fell into two parts: data collection and an editorial function. It wasn't clear how much editing the group was up for, and some of those details were punted until we had actual content to look at. For example, would we merge information from multiple resources into one "document" on the topic? Or would we let each statement stand on its own with credit to the person who offered it?

A very useful distinction was made between "solicited" input and "unsolicited" input. Having an outlet for unsolicited input, e.g. "letters to the editor" or a "counterpoint view" would allow for openness and mitigate feelings that the group was trying to dictate rather than describe a topic.

At this point, new action items came down to:

Action Items:

Finalize data collection/editorial process who? Chris/April

Finalize templates who? Chris/April with WG review

"Do it":

The group was asked to make sure they participate!


Web Elucidation of Internet Related Developments WG