 |
 |
Unless something goes disastrously wrong between now and July, I'm a definite. Matthew > -----Original Message----- > From: Ray Denenberg [mailto:[log in to unmask]] > Sent: Thursday, June 06, 2002 2:47 PM > To: [log in to unmask] > Subject: Re: Meeting Decision > > As Jan is the only one to respond, and since her response argues for > staying > with the planned date, that's what we'll do (and I hope that means you'll > come, Jan). > > So we will meet July 11-12. More details will follow. > > I believe the following people are "definites": > Ralph > Poul Henrik > Matthew > Ray > Larry > Corey > And in the "Likely to attend" category are: > Jan > Rob > Please let me know if I've mischaracterized anyone's status above. > > Anyone else on this list is wecome to attend. Please let me know. > > --Ray > > > Janifer Gatenby wrote: > > > I would like to see a meeting as early as possible, especially to > finalise > > CQL. Perhaps at the end of the first day a summary email could be sent > to > > the list and those who cannot be present could phone in early the next > day > > for comment if desired or they could just send a reply email to the > list. > > I'm thinking in particular of Alan - he would be 14 hours ahead of DC > time > > so 9:00 would be 23:00. > > > > Janifer > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Ray Denenberg [mailto:[log in to unmask]] > > Sent: Tuesday, 4 June 2002 16:21 > > To: [log in to unmask] > > Subject: Meeting Decision > > > > I think the consensus (although from a very small > > opinion-population) is that we should hold a > > meeting rather than try to come to closure via > > email. > > > > However I don't know whether people think that > > July 11-12 is an optimal time. (I don't mean > > logistically -- that's the date we've settled on > > if we have the meeting any time in the next two > > months.) Nobody's offered an opinion on that. > > > > What I mean is: (1) can we get enough done in the > > next month so that a meeting July 11-12 will be > > productive, or (2) would it be better to continue > > to work through these specifications via email > > until, say, late August, and then have a meeting? > > > > Sorry to drag this out. I'd like to hear opinions > > that focus on this question alone (not "yes, I'll > > come if you have the meeting"), even from those of > > you who would not attend. We'll decide by tomorrow > > or Thursday. As of now, we'll go with the July > > 11-12 date unless there are opinions to the > > contrary. > > > > --Ray