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
Wed Mar 26 14:39:37 EST 2003

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>
03/26/2003 12:19 PM
        To:     "Gail Songer" <gsonger at>, Harry 
Lewis/Boulder/IBM at IBMUS, <pwg at>
        Subject:        RE: PWG> RE: PWG-ANNOUNCE> Rearranging PWG 

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?
-----Original Message-----
From: Gail Songer [mailto:gsonger at]
Sent: Wednesday, March 26, 2003 11:11 AM
To: Farrell, Lee; Harry Lewis; pwg at
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] 
Sent: Wednesday, March 26, 2003 10:55 AM
To: Harry Lewis; pwg at
Subject: PWG> RE: PWG-ANNOUNCE> Rearranging PWG schedule
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 
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 Farrell 
Canon Development Americas 
110 Innovation Drive 
Irvine, CA  92612 
(949) 856-7163 - voice 
(949) 856-7510 - fax 
lee.farrell at 
-----Original Message-----
From: Harry Lewis [mailto:harryl at]
Sent: Wednesday, March 26, 2003 10:29 AM
To: pwg-announce at
Subject: PWG-ANNOUNCE> Rearranging PWG schedule

To recover from cancelation of D.C. I've prepared a scheduling guide. 

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 


Harry Lewis 
Chairman - ISTO Printer Working Group
IBM Printing Systems 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...

More information about the Pwg mailing list