Subject: [Mtgvenue] Comments on draft-baker-mtgvenue-iaoc-venue-selection-process

From: Mary Barnes <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2016 10:24:25 -0500

Hi all,

I reviewed the document and have some comments, in particular around
accessibility,  which is top priority identified in
draft-sullivan-mtgvenue-decisions, with which I fully agree.

- Section 3.3.4, 5th bullet.  I think IETF needs to have a higher standard
than adopting what might be the laws in the country in which the meeting is
held.  I think IETF needs to decide what their standards are and I think
http://www.sigaccess.org/welcome-to-sigaccess/resources/
accessible-conference-guide/ provides adequate guidelines.  It does a
adequate (if not thorough) job of addressing my concerns about food
provided at the meeting venue.  And, I think that makes a whole lot more
sense than IAOC trying to figure out whether a venue meets the requirements
of the local law (which could well NOT meet the accessibility requirements
such as those described in draft-sullivan).

- Section 3.3.5 2nd bullet. This oughtn't not be just Desired, it should be
Mandatory as otherwise you are not meeting accessibility/disability
requirements. In a foreign country, the expectation that everyone can have
their nutritional needs met by restaurants and IETF breaks is unrealistic
and indeed could be hazardous to people's health given potential gaps in
communication.  And, it actually contradicts your first bullet as for some
of us, grocery stores are the primary source "for meals that can
accommodate a wide range of dietary requirements."

Regards,
Mary.