Jim, you are right. After much discussion, the IPP group which included
almost everyone attending the PMP and JMP groups as well decided to
leave the meetings as planned. I'm taking that as a group decision (it was
almost unanimous) and proceeding with the dates as previously set.
Don
To: lstein%fapo.com @ interlock.lexmark.com (Larry Stein) @ SMTP
cc: pwg%pwg.org @ interlock.lexmark.com @ SMTP, ipp%pwg.org @
interlock.lexmark.com @ SMTP, jmp%pwg.org @ interlock.lexmark.com @ SMTP,
pmp%pwg.org @ interlock.lexmark.com @ SMTP, p1284_3 @ pad.prtdev.lexmark.com @
SMTP (bcc: Don Wright)
From: walker%dazel.com @ interlock.lexmark.com (Jim Walker) @ SMTP
Date: 01/16/97 10:01:07 AM
Subject: JMP> Re: PMP> Re: IPP> Question about April IPP meeting
(Sorry about the wide cross-posting, but it seems that this
issue *does* effect everybody.)
Larry Stein wrote:
>> I'll suggest the last week in March. This should'nt interfere with spring
> break, IETF, WinHEC or Thanksgiving. If anyone has a problem with this then
> send a note to me. This applies to P1284.4, 1394PWG, PWG, IPP?
Ahh, but it does interfere with Easter, which is a problem for some!
My recollection from the PWG meeting in Albuquerque was that we did
discuss both,
(1) adding another IPP meeting between the February/San Jose meeting
and the April/Austin/Memphis meeting(s), and/or
(2) adjusting the April meeting so that either,
(a) we scrapped the Austin meeting, and just met in Memphis, or
(b) we met some week other than April 2/3.
Many permutations of the above were discussed, and the basic decision
was to leave things as they were. Was I just amoking and inhaling,
or does anybody else remember this? BTW, the PWG minutes do not show
discussion of this particular issue, but does suggest that the April
meeting be extended to three days (April 2/3/4, presumably in Austin).
--
Jim Walker <walker at dazel.com>
System Architect/DAZEL Wizard
DAZEL Corporation, Austin, TX