NO. We're not trying to do so. In fact, in my table, I recommend several
easterly venues for consideration. Suggestions welcome.
----------------------------------------------
Harry Lewis
IBM Printing Systems
----------------------------------------------
"Farrell, Lee" <Lee.Farrell at cda.canon.com>
03/26/2003 12:19 PM
To: "Gail Songer" <gsonger at peerless.com>, Harry
Lewis/Boulder/IBM at IBMUS, <pwg at pwg.org>
cc:
Subject: RE: PWG> RE: PWG-ANNOUNCE> Rearranging PWG
schedule
Gail,
I suppose New York itself is not the critical item in my question about
the October meeting. [Although the idea of staying away from New York for
all future business seems a bit unrealistic. Surely by October, things
will have settled down to an acceptable level of insecurity, no?] I was
just noticing that all future (proposed) locations seem to be on the
western half of the Unitied States (Provo, Vancouver/Portland/Seattle, Las
Vegas). Are we trying to avoid *any* east-coast venues?
lee
-----Original Message-----
From: Gail Songer [mailto:gsonger at peerless.com]
Sent: Wednesday, March 26, 2003 11:11 AM
To: Farrell, Lee; Harry Lewis; pwg at pwg.org
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/20030326/2ae0bc5c/attachment-0001.html