Subject: Re: [Mtgvenue] editor's take on draft-ietf-mtgvenue-iaoc-venue-selection-process

From: Beatrice Martini <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2018 21:55:13 +0200

Hi Eliot,

Thank you for summarizing the current state of the discussion on possible
edits.

I have just subscribed to the list and can only access your message from
the Archive. So, as far as I can see, the only way for me to reply is to
start a new thread.
My apologies. I hope that keeping the same subject will help to minimize
the inconveniece.

Please find below feedback in regards to some of the requirements under
consideration.

On Sat, Apr 21, 2018 at 4:59 PM, Eliot Lear <[email-masked]>; wrote:

> There are currently five additional requirements under consideration:
>
>    1. No smoking - Proposed Section 3.1
>    2. Gender-neutral rest rooms - Proposed Section 3.3

Feedback:
Add a note on gender neutral restrooms to Section 3.2.2 Basic Venue
Criteria (not Section 3.3).

Proposed text:
"Venue and Facilities should have at least one gender neutral restroom,
with stalls and no urinals, on each floor."

>    3. Child care facilities - Proposed Section 3.3

Feedback:
Add two notes to Section 3.3. Other Considerations.

Proposed texts:
"It is desirable for Venue and Facilities to have at least one dedicated
infant feeding room and one family restroom."

"It is desirable that preferably the Facility, or failing that the IETF
Hotel(s), offer licensed childcare."

>    4. Conflicts regarding people with special needs or disabilities ???

You made a good point about this topic not being an actual criterion. It is
a kind of information that does not need to be shared in this document.

Other documents where it would be very good to include a note on this type
of conflict and how it will be addressed could be:

* Documentation related to the event management on site;

* Information provided to participants to inform them about venue
accessibility.

Thanks!

Best,
Beatrice

>    5. Budget hotels - Already present in Section 3.2
>
>
> At the moment there is proposed text for (1) and (3).  I do not have text
> for (2) or (4) yet.  I believe Pete asked for feedback from the IAOC on
(2)
> in particular, and I have questions regarding what to write on (4).  It
> seems we are zooming in on closing the last point (5) with no changes.
>
> Eliot
>
> _______________________________________________
> Mtgvenue mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mtgvenue
>