- From: Ralph R. Swick <swick@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2006 11:33:37 -0400
- To: public-swd-wg@w3.org
At last week's telecon at least one person noted [1] that his interest in scheduling a WG face-to-face meeting at MIT during the week of 22 January [2] would be influenced by the presence of other meetings nearby. [1] http://www.w3.org/2006/10/10-swd-minutes.html#item05 [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/chairs/2006JulSep/0018.html I don't know what other events there may be in Boston around that time, but I forward with permission a list of possible other W3C Working Groups who may meet that week: >From: Amy van der Hiel <amy@w3.org> >Subject: Re: [wbs] response to 'Multi-Group Meetings Logistics' >Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2006 17:26:50 -0400 >To: Ralph R.Swick <swick@w3.org> > >Hi Ralph, > >Thanks very much for following up on this. > >The other groups who have indicated the would like to meet are: > >WAF >EXI (possibly) >DI VB >RIF >MWI DD >PF >MMI >MWBP >UAWG >ATAG >WCAG >EOWG > >Please excuse the rain of letters! :) > >regards, >Amy > >On Oct 10, 2006, at 1:35 PM, Ralph R. Swick wrote: > >>I wrote: >>>[The SemWeb Deployment WG will] hold our first teleconference next >>>Tuesday, 10 October. >>>I intend to bring up the question there so I expect to have >>>a much better feel for the interest in meeting at MIT in >>>January by noon on Tuesday. >> >>The SWD WG did meet with 9 people present (8 of the 15 officially >>appointed WG participants plus one who is not yet officially >>appointed). >>We took a straw poll on interest in meeting the week of January 22 >>[1]. >> >>The results were 5 in favor of meeting, 3 unsure if they could >>attend, 1 neutral but may not attend and an action on me to >>communicate the desire of the WG to hold the option to meet >>for a couple of more weeks while we round up more telecon >>participation. >> >> [1] http://www.w3.org/2006/10/10-swd-minutes.html#item05 >> >>I did not state explicitly that the longer we wait the greater the >>risk >>that space may not be available but I think that was understood. >> >>At least one of the 'unsure' responses indicated that his decision >>may rest on whether there were other meetings he might need >>to attend. I think he was probably looking for non-W3C events >>but if a list of other WG meetings is available yet it may help >>him to make a decision. >> >>-Ralph
Received on Monday, 16 October 2006 15:34:19 UTC