[gnso-whoissurvey-dt] AC Chat transcript WSWG call 30th April 2012

[Nathalie Peregrine <nathalie.peregrine@xxxxxxxxx>]

Berry Cobb: Welcome to the 30 APR WSWG Call.

Cintra Sooknanan: Hi Everyone

Don Blumenthal: have to call back in on another line to fix echo

Nathalie  Peregrine: Wendy Seltzer has joined the call

Berry Cobb: Michele Neylon - michele@blacknightsolutions.ieBob Brasich - 
Bob_Brasich@mpaa.orgDan Seymour - dseymour@theesa.comDon Blumenthal - 
dblumenthal@pir.orgJim GalvinNicolas Adam - nickolas.adam@GMAIL.COMSteve Sheng 
- steve.sheng@icann.orgFrancisco Arias - francisco.arias@icann.orgDave 
Piscitello - dave.piscitello@xxxxxxxxx

Cintra Sooknanan: Also I'd like to add Evan Leibovitch evan@xxxxxxxxx

Cintra Sooknanan: and a couple others, I will get their information to you once 
they accept

avri: for me, i just forwarded on Berry's message asking if anyone was 
intersted.

Berry Cobb: Thank you Avri

Berry Cobb: Dear Council.Initially in the WSWG charter we described a step in 
our workflow that involved retaining a third party consulting resource to 
review the WSWG WHOIS (RDDS) requirements survey and provide comments on the 
structure on the questions in regards to general comprehension and structure.  
Some time after the WSWG began executing the work items in its charter, the WG 
decided to add a "beta test" of a draft candidate of the survey as well as post 
the draft survey for public comment.  We believe that these new activities 
represent a more comprehensive form of feedback that we would garner from a 
single consulting resource, making the consulting resource review a redundant 
and unnecessary action.  We therefore, respectfully, plan to not pursue the 
consulting resource review, unless explicitly requested to do so by the 
Council. Thank you.

Michael Young: note the commas are missing

Michael Young: :-)

Nathalie  Peregrine: Wilson is showing as connected on the bridge

avri: i think R-2.2 may need some worksmithing.

avri: wordsmithing

Michael Young: can you send suggested edits?

avri: i thinkl we are either sking about benefits or affect, but having both in 
the sentence confuses me.

Cintra Sooknanan: The question is in the positive

Cintra Sooknanan: so it is referring to benefits Only

Susan Prosser: also R-2.1 is first introduction to RDDS terms, may need 
definition

Cintra Sooknanan: should it be neutral  or should we have a separate question 
for negatives

Cintra Sooknanan: ???

Cintra Sooknanan: okie :) thanks

Cintra Sooknanan: Yes

Cintra Sooknanan: Do you expect someone to do the survey in one sitting

Cintra Sooknanan: ?

Don Blumenthal: What about the ability to start online, quit, and resume later?

Don Blumenthal: Great, especially given the length

Steve Metalitz: As previously advised, I will have to drop off in a couple of 
minutes.  Apologies.

Michael Young: thanks steve

Cintra Sooknanan: Just one comment with the last section 7a, we should ask the 
person to specify their optional time period

Michael Young: ah yes

Michael Young: good idea

Cintra Sooknanan: Sorry

Cintra Sooknanan: don't mean to regress

Cintra Sooknanan: Please specify, give reason

Cintra Sooknanan: Thanks Michael

Cintra Sooknanan: Lucky version 10 :)

Cintra Sooknanan: yes time is short to book a meeting

Cintra Sooknanan: Michael can you state the next steps when we can anticipate v 
10 will be ready for the testers (beta)?

Michael Young: sure

Michael Young: we have some flexibility

Cintra Sooknanan: Can't hear very soft

Susan Prosser: Cintra: was asking about consistency in format

Susan Prosser: yes, no, indifferent, vs no, & capitalization

Susan Prosser: thanks Michael

Cintra Sooknanan: Good call, thanks and Bye

Cintra Sooknanan: lol