I have an alternative for finishing up the MIB: have a teleconference,
rather than a face-to-face meeting between NYC and New Orleans.
We use teleconferences to finish up ISO DPA and it worked great!
No traveling. Busy people can usually arrange to take two hours out
here and there.
Teleconferences work particularly well when you are near the end of reviewing
a document, such as we are with the MIB. It helps a great deal to have
such documents line numbered for ease of reference on the telephone.
I'll check to see if Xerox would be willing to pay for, say, a two-hour
teleconference. With our system, participants would call into a special
800 number. I suspect that other companies have the same and could offer
to host additional calls, if we need them.
For ISO DPA teleconference process, each issue had three parts:
1. a problem statement
2. a suggested solution or list of alternative solutions
3. and a proposed exact text changes.
Each problem was numbered and had its own file in an FTP directory of issues.
The chairman would detect that a point being brought up was really a new
issue and would assign the next issue number to it and ask the participant
to write up the problem, suggested solution(s), and proposed text changes.
An issue wasn't approved until its exact text change was approved.
Then the editor just edited the change into the document.
With ISO DPA we had over 100 issues, so we had lots of teleconferences.
But with the Printer MIB, we are down to five or six issues.
At 06:11 09/26/96 PDT, JK Martin wrote:
>Given that we're coming down to the wire on the MIB, coupled with the
>fact that lots of people seem to be having trouble getting to the
>NYC meeting, I'd like to propose this idea to the PWG at large:
>>How about scheduling a meeting between NYC and New Orleans?
>>Besides continued effort on finishing the MIB, it has been quite a
>while since I've been able to present the current work on SENSE.
>Also, the topic of a standard network printing protocol has arisen;
>this topic is certainly going to take some time, even just to get
>>For lots of reasons, I would like to suggest that such a meeting be
>held in, say, Salt Lake City. Otherwise, Los Angeles or Portland
>(Oregon) would be a excellent locations due to the number of West
>Coast participants in those areas.
>>Comments? (Be kind! ;-)