Monday 5/22 anytime works for me. 5/23 in the afternoon works also. Curt
-----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Serge Plotkin Sent: Tuesday, May 02, 2006 9:58 AM To: Matt Ball; james hughes Cc: Fabio Maino; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Gideon Avida Subject: RE: Next P1619/1619.1 Meeting Tuesday May 23 works for me. Monday same week does not. -serge > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matt > Ball > Sent: Tuesday, May 02, 2006 8:12 AM > To: james hughes > Cc: Fabio Maino; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Gideon > Avida > Subject: RE: Next P1619/1619.1 Meeting > > How about Tuesday, May 23rd? We could set up a morning meeting for P1619, > have an hour break for lunch, then start an afternoon meeting for P1619.1. > Example: > > 8:00 am to 11:00 am (PDT): P1619 > noon to 3:00 pm (PDT): P1619.1 > > For east coast, the corresponding times would be 11-2 and 3-6, EDT. > > Does that work for everyone? Does Monday work better for anyone? Let's > try to get this setup by this Friday if possible. Jim, do you want to set > up a call-in through Sun, or should I set one up through Quantum? > > > Possible agenda: > > P1619: > - Discuss sending LRW mode to NIST. > - Review changes to P1619 by IEEE editors (if it's available by then) > - Discuss ballot committee for P1619 > - Discuss any proposals from Seagate and possibly submit a new PAR > > P1619.1: > - Review P1619.1-D6 and talk about any comments or concerns. > > > Anything else? > > Could we get an updated proposal from Seagate that addresses the previous > comments? It would also be good to have a proposal for a new PAR so that > we can review the wording. Ideally, we would want this information by > March 9th so that we have two weeks to chew on it. > > -Matt > > Matt Ball > Embedded Software Engineer > Quantum Corporation > 4001 Discovery Drive, Suite 1100 > Boulder, CO 80303 > (720) 406-5766 > > > -----Original Message----- > Frm: james hughes > Sent: Tuesday, May 02, 2006 8:45 AM > To: Matt Ball > Subject: Re: Next P1619/1619.1 Meeting > > .... > > The document is in for editorial review. We will be putting together a > ballot committee. > > > Is there anything else to talk about with P1619 besides submitting > > LRW to NIST? > > Submitting it to NIST and talking about the Seagate proposal > (Submitting a PAR for that mode). > > > I'll try to have P1619.1-D6 ready by this weekend, but if we > > _really_ needed it, I might be able to finish it by Wednesday night > > for a Thursday meeting. > > I would suggest Monday or Tuesday May 22 or 23.
