Please can someone clarify what the process is from here in?
In this post:
You should hear if your proposal is successful or not on the week of the 22 October. We may be in contact before this with questions or about opportunities for collaboration.
This suggests the community are being asked to submit session proposals in “isolation” (perhaps trying to also make it especially “interactive, engaging and inspiring”), without knowing what others are doing.
Who then decides? Will session ideas be shared in advance, so we can try to collaborate and coordinate?
For me, the idea of the TAG being a forum via which all sessions are submitted and rejected/accepted doesn’t sit well. I don’t consider the TAG to be like a conference.
Whilst I appreciate the co-ordination of such an event is an undertaking, I want to reiterate my previous post
My experience of the last few TAG meetings has been that the majority of time has been taken up / scheduled beforehand - and that generally the approach for sessions has been some presentations, followed by group discussion. Before we know it, the music stops and we’re off to the next session!
I’m just a bit worried that there’ll be no chance to get to the bottom of the activity-status mix-up (a discussion which is 48 posts long), or percentages not equaling 100%, or whether pyIATI is a thing. And many other lose threads we’ve got around Discuss, GitHub or elsewhere.
We’ve now ~10 years of working with this standard. Hopefully, many of the people with experience and insights will be in the room(s). The time and effort to get to the TAG means we need to optimise, when there. It’d be a shame if we’re split between choices in a conference programme and heading to different rooms, potentially leaving that really important discussion about hierarchies to the corridor.
To note - this isn’t a call for a grand rethink. I’m very confident that the community can share their insights and experience of using the standard. I just want to be sure that we make sure we can cover some of the less glamorous detail, that hits us all when using the standard.
Some of those conversations might not be “interactive, engaging and inspiring” (actually, they will be if @herman is around!), but I’m very willing to listen and participate.