I also favor not rescheduling every meeting. For one I really don't see
why we should change Provo in December. And I'd rather try to squeeze a
fourth meeting, because I think long phone conference calls are far less
efficient than face to face meetings.
Regarding Washington DC or New York, I'm afraid the risks will remain
for more than the next few months... and business will still take place
there. So unless some people don't want to go there any more at all, I
don't think rescheduling New York somewhere else is necessary.
Having come back from Europe last week-end, I haven't seen any special
change at airports. (Security is much stronger since September 11
anyway)
And Harry thanks for taking care of these issues and trying to make
everybody happy.
Alain Regnier
Ricoh
-----Original Message-----
From: don at lexmark.com [mailto:don at lexmark.com]
Sent: Wednesday, March 26, 2003 11:48 AM
To: Harry Lewis
Cc: thrasher at lexmark.com; pwg at pwg.org
Subject: Re: PWG> RE: PWG-ANNOUNCE> Rearranging PWG schedule
Why not leave December as Provo and have people schedule for that rather
than move everything around? That WAS the plan.
**********************************************
Don Wright don at lexmark.com
Chair, IEEE SA Standards Board
Member, IEEE-ISTO Board of Directors
f.wright at ieee.org / f.wright at 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 at us.ibm.com>@pwg.org on 03/26/2003 02:43:32 PM
Sent by: owner-pwg at pwg.org
To: thrasher at lexmark.com
cc: pwg at 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 at lexmark.com
Sent by: owner-pwg at pwg.org
03/26/2003 12:02 PM
To: pwg at 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 at cda.canon.com>@pwg.org on 03/26/2003
01:54:34
PM
Sent by: owner-pwg at pwg.org
To: "Harry Lewis" <harryl at us.ibm.com>, <pwg at 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 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>
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
----------------------------------------------
(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)