>If we can squeeze an evening discussion about SENSE into the mix,
>then great. But the JMP and PMP groups really need focus right
>now, so let's give it to them. (pun intended... ;-)
Why not do SENSE Wed evening, since UPD has been canceled?
And of coures, if PMP does need time on Friday, then they can have some.
At 14:31 06/12/97 PDT, JK Martin wrote:
>Sheesh, give 'em an inch and they take a bloody mile... ;-)
>>Ok, I realize that we'll need more than the usual time for JMP,
>since this is supposed to be the *last* meeting before final
>>We'll start on Thursday nite, then wrap up on Friday by 3:00pm.
>>At this rate, it looks like SENSE will once again be deferred
>until a future PWG meeting, as everyone will probably be quite
>burnt out, given the IPP and JMP efforts.
>>----- Begin Included Message -----
>>>From jmp-owner at pwg.org Thu Jun 12 12:17 EDT 1997
>Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 09:08:37 PDT
>To: jmp at pwg.org, sense at pwg.org, JK Martin <jkm at underscore.com>
>From: Tom Hastings <hastings at cp10.es.xerox.com>
>Subject: JMP> Re: PWG> Proposed change to the June meeting schedule [JMP ALL
> DAY FRIDAY, and THUR NITE]
>Cc: pwg at pwg.org>>Jay,
>>I talked with Ron Bergman and we agreed that JMP could use all of
>Friday, up to the usual closing time of 3:00pm EDT. Ron is travelling,
>so he wanted me to convey this message ASAP, since JMP participants
>may need to change their plane reservations. We see from
>Lloyd's response that PMP doesn't need any time Friday. We'd also like
>to keep Thursday evening as scheduled as well.
>>The high level JMP agenda is:
>>1. Answer any issues that arise between now and the meeting.
>2. Review the current draft (V0.82 = Internet-Draft 01) and resolve
> any issues.
>3. Review mappings from each job submission protocol to the Job Monitoring
> MIB for that separate document that we'll produce as an informational
> RFC. The review of the mapping will also be helping us with the review
> of the MIB itself. I'm sure we'll get lots of "Oh, it that what that
> attribute means, we need to clarify ...". In effect, producing and
> reviewing the mappings from job submission protocols to the Job MIB
> will be like a "paper backoff". And I sure would like to clear up
> ambiguities BEFORE we publish the proposed standard, rather than
>>So we can sure use all the time.
>>Thanks for your generosity in making it available,
>Tom and Ron
>>>At 13:04 06/09/97 PDT, JK Martin wrote:
>>Given the fact that both the Printer MIB (PMP) and Job Monitoring MIB
>>(JMP) projects are in the eleventh hour and are about to "finish", it
>>is probably in the best interests of the PWG to let those groups have
>>priority scheduling at the upcoming June meetings.
>>>>Therefore (once again), I am willing to give up the Friday meeting
>>slot time for SENSE so that these groups have a chance to actually
>>complete their work at these meetings.
>>>>Given the large amount of finalization needed for the Job MIB, it
>>could be that the JMP group needs BOTH the Thursday nite meeting
>>slot IN ADDITION TO a Friday slot.
>>>>As I recall, the PMP group is in much better shape, but it could be
>>that at least 2 hours are needed for this group's final effort.
>>>>Ron Bergman (JMP chair) and Lloyd Young (PMP chair): would you two
>>please comment on this rescheduling opportunity, stating what your
>>requirements are? Please respond as soon as possible, as a change
>>in scheduling (either duration or start-time) may affect some
>>participants' travel plans.
>>>>If we can squeeze an evening discussion about SENSE into the mix,
>>then great. But the JMP and PMP groups really need focus right
>>now, so let's give it to them. (pun intended... ;-)
>>-- JK Martin | Email: jkm at underscore.com --
>>-- Underscore, Inc. | Voice: (603) 889-7000 --
>>-- 41C Sagamore Park Road | Fax: (603) 889-2699 --
>>-- Hudson, NH 03051-4915 | Web: http://www.underscore.com --
>>>>>>At 14:57 06/09/97 PDT, lpyoung at lexmark.com wrote:
>>Thanks for thinking of us but the Printer MIB does not need any time
>>on the agenda for the June meeting. Everything that is left to be
>>resolved can be resolved via the mailing list.
>>>>>>>>>>>>----- End Included Message -----