Subject: [Mtgvenue] Comments on draft-sullivan-mtgvenue-decisions-00

From: Mary Barnes <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2016 09:29:00 -0500

Sorry, I was on the wrong draft with my comments.

I think this document is a great idea.  My point was with regards to the
accessiblity objective, which is focused on ensuring those with physical
disabilities have access. It seems that the wording might have been
carefully selected to avoid the word disability, but the intent of
accessibility laws are intended to support those with disabilities. So, I
think other disabilities, including invisible disabilities ought also be a
factor (in the US, celiac disease is considered an invisible disability).
My food document has been around for 8 years and it provides quite a bit of
detail on how the latter can be handled, as well as supporting other food
allergies and dietary preferences.   Things have most definitely improved
in the past 8 years and the secretariat does an excellent job of ensuring
that any catered meetings have options.   But, the general refreshments at
breaks are hit or miss.  Berlin, in the past, was not at all good.  I will
be updating my food document to include more specific recommendations on
how breaks could be managed that could address this problem.

On Fred's response that IETF accessiblity requirements could be expressed
as a preference, I think that contradicts the objective as stated in this
document.  I think IETF needs to decide their policy for accessibility
(accommodating those with disabilities) and have expectations that a venue
must meet those policies or it's not an acceptable venue.

Regards,
Mary.

---

From: Andrew Sullivan <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2016 11:28:08 -0400

On Mon, Jul 18, 2016 at 09:29:00AM -0500, Mary Barnes wrote:

> accessibility laws are intended to support those with disabilities.

I don't think we especially selected words to avoid saying
"disability", but rather were attempting to avoid terms that would
bind us to a particular socio-cultural-legal regime.  Anyway, the goal
is not this or that kind of disability, but rather to try to
generalise as widely as possible: that these various abilities lie on
several axes.

Anyway, we can work on making the text clearer on this point.  Thanks.

A

-- 
Andrew Sullivan
[email-masked]