[Infrastructure] Issues with Minutes

[Dimitris Zacharopoulos (HARICA)]

On 2019-12-16 6:09 μ.μ., Jos Purvis (jopurvis) wrote:
>
> Having now published the minutes from a bunch of meetings plus the 
> last couple face-to-face minutes, I’m struggling a bit. The minutes 
> from the last F2F in particular have a number of rather…interesting 
> textual approaches, shall we say (indifferent or missing 
> capitalization, typos, curious formatting, etc.), and it’s a real 
> struggle to publish those as approved because they’re difficult to 
> read and follow, in addition to not being the best representation of 
> the Forum overall.
>
> I hesitate to say anything because I know we have a number of members 
> for whom English is not a first language (although many of those do 
> not take minutes, it seems like), and I know even for people that do 
> have English as a first language some of this stuff can be a struggle. 
> I don’t mind correcting obvious typos as we go, but the F2F minutes 
> are enormous (very time-consuming to reformat and edit), and I get 
> very nervous about removing editorial comments or re-rendering 
> sentences when publishing things, because I don’t ever want to modify 
> the meaning of something away from what was formally approved. Would 
> it be too much to request that minute-takers take a minute to review 
> and clean up minutes when uploading? Not sure how to bring this up 
> with the Forum.
>

Hi Jos,

There are several members that try to improve the quality of the 
minutes, both in quantity and quality :-) We had a long review period 
for the approval of the F2F minutes. My expectation is that anyone can 
edit the minutes when they are in the review process, especially if the 
edits are to improve language (grammar, syntax, etc). Contributions from 
native English speakers in this area is greatly appreciated!

Now that the minutes are approved I don't think we can go back and 
correct them. I would only go through an update process if what is 
currently written is not accurate or doesn't capture one's opinion 
correctly. IMO typos or grammatical changes are not a very strong 
reasons to go through this process.

Thanks,
Dimitris.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://cabforum.org/pipermail/infrastructure/attachments/20191216/d253154c/attachment.html>