W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org > April 2012

RE: Tuesday meetings -- the semantics of "Reminder" vs "Confirmation"

From: Mead, Charlie (NIH/NCI) [C] <meadch@mail.nih.gov>
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2012 12:20:24 -0400
To: Helena Deus <helenadeus@gmail.com>
CC: "public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org" <public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org>, Eric Prud'hommeaux <eric@w3.org>, Michel Dumontier <michel.dumontier@gmail.com>, "Bulusu, Vijay" <Vijay.Bulusu@pfizer.com>
Message-ID: <4D241B2CAA657641A30147AA5BF6AE7829937DCE21@NIHMLBX07.nih.gov>
Hi Lena -

Only two people (plus me) showed up.  The three of us on the call assumed that by virtue of me not sending out a reminder - a failure that I take 100% responsibility for - people assumed the call was cancelled.  Hence the email to clarify Reminder vs Confirmation.  I do agree that the TF calls should be more organized - again, my responsibility - and that, as a consequence, they should be preceded by a Reminder letting people know what's going to happen on the call.  The point of the clarification email, however, is that in the absence of a Reminder, the call is still "On."

Take care,


From: Helena Deus [mailto:helenadeus@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2012 17:47
To: Mead, Charlie (NIH/NCI) [C]
Cc: public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org; Eric Prud'hommeaux; Michel Dumontier; Bulusu, Vijay
Subject: Re: Tuesday meetings -- the semantics of "Reminder" vs "Confirmation"

Hi Charlie,

Regrets, I could not attend today.
I agree that the global HCLS calls should be "on" by default.
The task force calls, however, may require a bit more preparation from the chairs and as such, may need further confirmation on whether they will happen or not... I was hoping that with this new system all I had to do was manage this in the google calendar, which I did. What went wrong with the calendar of the global HCLS call today?

On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 4:33 PM, Mead, Charlie (NIH/NCI) [C] <meadch@mail.nih.gov<mailto:meadch@mail.nih.gov>> wrote:
All -

It appears that there is some confusion - and, as a result, we had a short discussion on today's "Tuesday HCLS call" - of the meaning - dare I say "the semantics -- of the terms Reminder vs Confirmation as those terms apply to the Tuesday 11am EDT HCLS calls.  It is my understanding that although I and the other HCLS CoChairs <<should>> send out a <<reminder>> about the meeting, the absence of a reminder - for whatever reason - is <<not>> a de facto <<cancellation>> of the meeting, i.e. the meetings do <<not>> require a formal <<confirmation>> to occur, and the absence of a reminder should not be interpreted as a cancellation.  They are on our respective calendars and unless a particular meeting is formally cancelled, it is assumed to be on, irrespective of whether the CoChair remembers/has the time to send out a formal reminder.


Thanks in advance -


Helena F. Deus
Post-Doctoral Researcher at DERI/NUIG
Received on Tuesday, 24 April 2012 16:22:52 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 14:52:52 UTC