Cheryl Langdon-Orr ha scritto:
Vittorio, I had and I suspect others of us (particularly us newbie's) on the ALAC had expected that list activities would contribute to if not formulate the final ALAC response at this stage on this topic... And with the advise that John was doing a final Draft I again assumed that was to be utilisable by the ALAC. This misinterpretation on my part will be raised as an example of a communication and process / expectations mismatch issue in the ALAC workshop on Sunday Oct 28th.
I don't think it was a misinterpretation - that was my understanding as well. I must comment that I asked a certain number of times both for comments by ALAC members, as early as possible so not to risk reopening the issues at a later point in time, and for what was the procedure that the ALAC intended to employ to release it (which, to me, seems a question to be sorted out by the Chair, so it possibly got caught in the switches between different people acting as Chair). This was necessary for me, as the lead drafter, to be able to plan my activity, as I had to find substantive amounts of time in very busy weeks, in which I was often traveling. I did not get comments from ALAC members, and I agree with you that this might just be silence=consent, but when no one sends anything it leaves you a bit lost; also I did not get indications on what should I do with the final draft, and whether the ALAC wanted to examine it, and how, and when, prior to releasing it. If I had been sure that I and the WG were representative of the views of the ALAC, I'd just have sent it, as I did several times in the past couple of years, to cover up for similar situations (and yes, covering up is perhaps not the right thing to do, but you don't always have the time to sort out your internal workings on the spot). But at the moment when I did not have any clear mandate or position on behalf of the ALAC any more, I thought I could not make that assumption any more. At the same time, also considering the more general comments by Robert and others... this phase remembers me of a company restructuring, when new owners come on board and they change the organization and part of the management, usually under strict time and budget constraints. In the end, they'll certainly make some mistakes and pay the switching costs, and certain things will unavoidably go bust because of the confusion and tension associated with changes, but this is not the point - the point is having clear which structure you are trying to build, finding ways to manage the transition, and conclude it as quickly as possible, without delay. I would expect that, at latest by the end of the LA meeting, the ALAC has a clear organization and management, so that similar situations do not happen in the future. This is much more important than who gets to land in which box in the organizational chart. I suggest you to focus on the former and not on the latter. Regards, -- vb. Vittorio Bertola - vb [a] bertola.eu <-------- --------> finally with a new website at http://bertola.eu/ <--------