In support of Elliott --
Remember.... Vancouver is NOT a US destination. (Really!!) Those outside
the US might find it easier to go to Canada than to come here.
---Edmond Burke: "The only thing needed for evil to prosper is for good men to do nothing."
********************************************** Don Wright don@lexmark.com
Chair, IEEE SA Standards Board Member, IEEE-ISTO Board of Directors f.wright@ieee.org / f.wright@computer.org
Director, Alliances & Standards Lexmark International 740 New Circle Rd Lexington, Ky 40550 859-825-4808 (phone) 603-963-8352 (fax) **********************************************
ElliottBradshaw@oaktech.com@pwg.org on 03/26/2003 03:27:41 PM
Sent by: owner-pwg@pwg.org
To: pwg@pwg.org cc: Subject: Re: PWG> RE: PWG-ANNOUNCE> Rearranging PWG schedule
First of all, thanks to Harry for putting up with all this...you probably had other things you wanted to do this week.
That being said, it seems the "raging debate" genie is out of the bottle.
I am disappointed we had to cancel DC, but agree it was necessary. It would be interesting, as Bill suggests, to know whether no-travel policies are blanket or based on destination.
For various philosophical reasons, I would be disappointed if we re-scheduled away from NYC. In addition, it is one of my favorite places to go.
I guess the only reason for a quick discussion on Provo is because of ticket change rules. If someone can push back on AA and get them to relax their policy, then we should be able to leave the schedule as it was, for now, and discuss proposed changes with less haste.
As for this spring, under the circumstances I think a May meeting would be hard to pull off. The argument that we should keep five meetings is a good one, but I think we may have to compromise this time.
I favor a meeting in June, and any of those weeks looks good to me. Speaking just for me personally, I would keep it in Vancouver, but obviously not if that would hurt attendance.
All that being said, I will support and thank Harry for whatever action he deems best.
E.
------------------------------------------ Elliott Bradshaw Director, Software Engineering Oak Technology Imaging Group 781 638-7534
don@lexmark.co m To: Harry Lewis <harryl@us.ibm.com> Sent by: cc: thrasher@lexmark.com, pwg@pwg.org owner-pwg@pwg. Subject: Re: PWG> RE: PWG-ANNOUNCE> Rearranging org PWG schedule
03/26/2003 02:47 PM
Why not leave December as Provo and have people schedule for that rather than move everything around? That WAS the plan.
********************************************** Don Wright don@lexmark.com
Chair, IEEE SA Standards Board Member, IEEE-ISTO Board of Directors f.wright@ieee.org / f.wright@computer.org
Director, Alliances & Standards Lexmark International 740 New Circle Rd Lexington, Ky 40550 859-825-4808 (phone) 603-963-8352 (fax) **********************************************
Harry Lewis <harryl@us.ibm.com>@pwg.org on 03/26/2003 02:43:32 PM
Sent by: owner-pwg@pwg.org
To: thrasher@lexmark.com cc: pwg@pwg.org Subject: Re: PWG> RE: PWG-ANNOUNCE> Rearranging PWG schedule
We can try (to nail the next meeting quickly). This is why I posted the scheduling guide. For those who need to reschedule flights to avoid penalty... my suggestion is to book into Provo in October. I don't believe rescheduling the entire year is feasible.
If we churn on this (which it looks like we are) ... some people will be hosed. ---------------------------------------------- Harry Lewis IBM Printing Systems ----------------------------------------------
thrasher@lexmark.com Sent by: owner-pwg@pwg.org 03/26/2003 12:02 PM
To: pwg@pwg.org cc: Subject: Re: PWG> RE: PWG-ANNOUNCE> Rearranging PWG schedule
Since there are time constraints for the near term, can we just get the very next F2F meeting scheduled ASAP and look at further re-arrangements at that F2F...????
For me...using keywords instead of numbers.......:)
June 2-6 (preferable) June 16-20 (acceptable)
Location options (no preference)... for either week.
JT
"Farrell, Lee" <Lee.Farrell@cda.canon.com>@pwg.org on 03/26/2003 01:54:34 PM
Sent by: owner-pwg@pwg.org
To: "Harry Lewis" <harryl@us.ibm.com>, <pwg@pwg.org> cc: 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@cda.canon.com ===========================
-----Original Message----- From: Harry Lewis [mailto:harryl@us.ibm.com] Sent: Wednesday, March 26, 2003 10:29 AM To: pwg-announce@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> 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@pwg.org NOT pwg-announce!
---------------------------------------------- Harry Lewis Chairman - ISTO Printer Working Group IBM Printing Systems ---------------------------------------------- (See attached file: C.htm)
#### C.htm has been removed from this note on March 26, 2003 by Harry Lewis
(See attached file: C.htm)
(See attached file: C.htm)
(See attached file: C.htm)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Mar 26 2003 - 15:55:13 EST