PWG> RE: PWG-ANNOUNCE> Rearranging PWG schedule

PWG> RE: PWG-ANNOUNCE> Rearranging PWG schedule

PWG> RE: PWG-ANNOUNCE> Rearranging PWG schedule

Harry Lewis harryl at us.ibm.com
Wed Mar 26 14:37:48 EST 2003


I've already anticipated the NYC fear factor (and responded to input I've 
received,privately) by recommending we move NYC to Provo in October. This 
has no effect on our schedule. Novell has already agreed. 

Please let's not launch a raging debate about how appropriate one fear is 
vs another. 
---------------------------------------------- 
Harry Lewis 
IBM Printing Systems 
---------------------------------------------- 




"Gail Songer" <gsonger at peerless.com>
03/26/2003 12:11 PM
 
        To:     "Farrell, Lee" <Lee.Farrell at cda.canon.com>, Harry 
Lewis/Boulder/IBM at IBMUS, <pwg at pwg.org>
        cc: 
        Subject:        RE: PWG> RE: PWG-ANNOUNCE> Rearranging PWG 
schedule


 
For those of you with travel restrictions, do you have enough history with 
them to have an idea of how long they might last?  Will we have to wait 
out the war and the orange alert?
 
I don’t know about anyone else, but personally, I’m not too thrilled about 
traveling to New York.  (Says the girl who lives near a potential target 
for North Korean missiles)
 
 
-----Original Message-----
From: Farrell, Lee [mailto:Lee.Farrell at cda.canon.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, March 26, 2003 10:55 AM
To: Harry Lewis; pwg at pwg.org
Subject: PWG> RE: PWG-ANNOUNCE> Rearranging PWG schedule
 
Harry,
 
What's the fundamental goal here?  To revisit the schedule for all future 
meetings in the year, or just up to (but not including) October?
 
Is there any reason not to try to "squeeze in" four [newly scheduled] 
meetings into the remainder of the year?  [For example, June 2-6, August 
4-9, October 6-10 (why not still hold this in New York?), and December 1-5 
seem reasonable goals for future meetings.  Eight week separation on 
average, but still allowing four face-to-face meetings for the rest of the 
year. 
 
Given that this organization has already cut down this year's schedule of 
meetings to only five, I would think that we should avoid reducing it to 
four if we can.
 
Any thoughts?
 
lee
=========================== 
Lee Farrell 
Canon Development Americas 
110 Innovation Drive 
Irvine, CA  92612 
(949) 856-7163 - voice 
(949) 856-7510 - fax 
lee.farrell at cda.canon.com 
=========================== 
-----Original Message-----
From: Harry Lewis [mailto:harryl at us.ibm.com]
Sent: Wednesday, March 26, 2003 10:29 AM
To: pwg-announce at pwg.org
Subject: PWG-ANNOUNCE> Rearranging PWG schedule

To recover from cancelation of D.C. I've prepared a scheduling guide. 
ftp://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/general/misc/DCRecovery.pdf 

As you can see, two weeks in June appear to be the best alternatives. 
Please identify any conflicts / alignments I have missed. We need to 
settle on the next meeting date quickly so people can reschedule their 
canceled flights. People flying AA seem to have the shortest amount of 
time and we may not be able to reschedule within their 2 day deadline! In 
this case I recommend these people reschedule for the Provo meeting in 
October. 

PLEASE HOLD DISCUSSION OF THIS TOPIC ON pwg at pwg.org NOT pwg-announce! 

---------------------------------------------- 
Harry Lewis 
Chairman - ISTO Printer Working Group
IBM Printing Systems 
---------------------------------------------- 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.pwg.org/archives/pwg/attachments/20030326/c8504318/attachment-0001.html


More information about the Pwg mailing list