CWG meeting 2012-10-15

Communication Working Group meeting on Monday 15th October 2012

Attendees

Harry Wood
RichardW
JonathanB

Topics

Front page banners
Draft announcement

IRC log:

21:00 harry-wood: CWG now?
21:00 rweait: hello then.
21:01 rweait: How are we all?
21:01 JonathanB: Evening
21:02 harry-wood: Si I forwarded my email of earlier today about banners
21:03 harry-wood: by coincidence I just got a reply from TomH about that
21:03 harry-wood: (management list)
21:03 rweait: seems the banner is down now. I don't get MT mail.
21:03 harry-wood: just forwarded that
21:04 harry-wood: He's explaining that the SOTM.EU banner was denied because of the concern that it would steal thunder form the main SOTM
21:04 harry-wood: makes sense
21:05 harry-wood: I mean personally I think it makes sense that we didn't put a SOTM.EU banner
21:05 JonathanB: OK -- so maybe there's something for MT/board to look at -- do we need to strongly discourage clashing events full stop?
21:05 rweait: Anything else we plan to discuss today? There is the draft announcement that is withing for input.
21:06 harry-wood: [REDACTED] one?
21:06 rweait: yes.
21:06 rweait: I was being all circumspect.
21:06 harry-wood: I liked the look of that. Sorry should've emailed saying so earlier. Is it just waiting for us?
21:06 rweait: Nope waiting on their self-description.
21:07 harry-wood: ah rght
21:07 rweait: and a go-ahead for the date. It was originally for today, but nothing happened.
21:08 harry-wood: ok. Anything else to say about that then?
21:09 rweait: I think not. Any other topicsto schedule todaY?
21:09 harry-wood: RichardF around today BTW?
21:09 rweait: traveling I think.
21:09 rweait: as is Henk, iirc
21:10 harry-wood: OK. Nobody put forward agenda items by email
21:11 harry-wood: on the banners topic
21:11 rweait: as for ads, I can see that my local Mappy Hour is too small for a site ad, though perfectly on target. I'd suggest that FOSS4G might be big enough, but off-target. Where do we draw the lines, if not "OSMF Sponsored"
21:11 rweait: Does an ESRI conference get an ad?
21:11 harry-wood: Well I put forward the suggestion of SOTM only.
21:12 rweait: Shall we stick with that and leave it for MT to revise if needed?
21:12 JonathanB: Well, this might be going off slightly, but is there an issue over SotM as a trademark?
21:13 rweait: :-)
21:13 rweait: Could be.
21:13 rweait: OSM(F) has been pretty generous that way 'til now.
21:13 JonathanB: Seriously -- if these groups are able to call their conference SotM without checking, we have a problem when someone we *don't* want to starts using it.
21:14 rweait: I see that as a serious topic.
21:14 rweait: Same with "OpenStreetMap" as a name for an app, etc...
21:14 rweait: ask MT to draft a trademark and naming policy?
21:14 JonathanB: Yes -- sounds like a good first step
21:14 harry-wood: Well the trademark status of OpenStreetMap has been discussed before no doubt
21:15 rweait: we'll want a policy relating to the logo if nothing else.
21:15 harry-wood: didn't hear anything about it being registered by us, but maybe somebody did something
21:15 rweait: "OpenStreetMap" registered in EU, but declined in US, iirc...
21:16 harry-wood: oh yeah?
21:16 harry-wood: hmm
21:16 harry-wood: Is this a CWG issue?
21:16 rweait: not for us to decide though, without direction from elsewhere, I'd say.
21:16 JonathanB: It's something we can be concerned about, but not within our remit
21:16 JonathanB: Names and logos are part of communication, after all
21:17 harry-wood: yeah
21:17 harry-wood: it could be a CWG issue
21:17 harry-wood: Maybe I'll ask MT about that too then
21:17 rweait: Sounds good.
21:18 harry-wood: for the banner issueâ�¦. MT discussion progressed as far as TomH saying he does see it the space being used for regional conferences
21:18 JonathanB: Yep -- make it clear that we're not trying to play territorial games, but are concerned it's an area of weakness
21:18 rweait: So we went off a bit on trade marks, are we done with ads? What did we decide? :-)
21:18 harry-wood: I'll leave it a little longer see if any discussion plays out
21:18 JonathanB: "CWG recommends official SotM only"?
21:18 harry-wood: yeah? ok
21:18 harry-wood: I kind of said that before
21:19 rweait: sure.
21:19 JonathanB: OK - carried!
21:19 harry-wood: I'll re-raise the "where does it end" concern
21:19 rweait: and we can be happy ifsomeone else crafts a clear policy that is more inclusive.
21:20 harry-wood: yup
21:20 harry-wood: If there's nothing else urgent to discussâ�¦.
21:20 harry-wood: let's gather up some ideas for a bigger meeting next Monday
21:20 harry-wood: RichardF and Henk will be around then d'you think?
21:20 rweait: You'll keep an eye for the response re: the draft and post once it arrives?
21:21 harry-wood: want me to post it?
21:21 harry-wood: I'm happy for you to do it
21:21 rweait: sure. Timezones and all. no need to wait once they've given the okay.
21:21 harry-wood: ok will try to watch out for that
21:22 harry-wood: somebody send an email mid-week to kick everyone, and we'll think of some more broad-reaching communications related ideas for next time hey?
21:23 rweait: Cool.
21:23 JonathanB: Righty ho
21:23 rweait: all done then?
21:23 harry-wood: Think so
21:23 rweait: ttfn.
21:23 harry-wood: see you next time then!