W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > October to December 2002

RE: Meeting postponed

From: Lee Roberts <leeroberts@roserockdesign.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 18:52:29 -0800
To: "'Web Content Guidelines'" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Message-ID: <00a301c2a709$b1388210$5f814094@rose>

The 9th would be best for me as well.

Sincerely,
Lee Roberts
President/CEO
405-321-6372
Rose Rock Design, Inc.
http://www.roserockdesign.com
 

-----Original Message-----
From: w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org] On
Behalf Of Doyle
Sent: Wednesday, December 18, 2002 4:48 PM
To: jasonw@ariel.ucs.unimelb.edu.au; Web Content Guidelines
Subject: Re: Meeting postponed



To the group -

The 9th would be best for me as I am away till the 6th.

Doyle

-- 
Doyle Burnett
Education Specialist
Multiple Disabilities Program
907-562-7372
> From: Jason White <jasonw@ariel.ucs.unimelb.edu.au>
> Reply-To: jasonw@ariel.ucs.unimelb.edu.au
> Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2002 10:37:13 +1100
> To: Web Content Guidelines <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
> Subject: Meeting postponed
> Resent-From: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
> Resent-Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 18:37:29 -0500 (EST)
> 
> 
> This week's meeting was supposed to be our long-awaited return to 
> checkpoint 4.1. Due to the regrets which have been received, your 
> co-Chairs and W3C staff contact propose that the meeting be postponed.
> 
> I assume that 26 December is out of the question due to public 
> holidays in Europe, North America, Australia and possibly elsewhere. 
> Would 2 January 2003 be feasible, or should we postpone until 9 
> January?
> 
> 
Received on Wednesday, 18 December 2002 19:53:14 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:47:20 GMT