Jean, I've just emailed Paul backing your 13th decision. Sorry I didn't remember seeing your final mail to him with that decision so this morning thought we still had an issue to sort. Shaun ##################################################################### Dr Shaun Forth Applied Mathematics & Operational Research Engineering Systems Department Cranfield University, Shrivenham Campus Swindon SN6 8LA, England tel.: +44 (0)1793 785311 fax.: +44 (0)1793 784196 email: S.A.Forth@cranfield.ac.uk http://www.amorg.co.uk http://www.rmcs.cranfield.ac.uk/amor #####################################################################
-----Original Message----- From: org-ad-workshop-bounces@lists.rwth-aachen.de [mailto:org-ad-workshop-bounces@lists.rwth-aachen.de] On Behalf Of Jean Utke Sent: Tuesday, February 07, 2006 3:12 PM To: Christian Bischof Cc: Organizers AD Workshop Subject: Re: [Org-ad-workshop] Date(s) for final version
Shaun, Uwe,
The only answer I got yesterday was the one from Chris (see below, I think you got it too) which I took as the answer and relayed last evening to Barbara and Paul. Today's deadline looming made me think I shouldn't wait any longer. I.e. I think the 13th it is. I can do the review after that provided you trust me with it and confirm with you whatever I find per e-mail. I wish we didn't have this conundrum because the 10th has long been known to be the date. On the other hand I do want to make sure we get the best possible version of the paper and if the additional time makes it better then I am all for the extension. Sorry for the confusion. Lets blame on the 6 or 7 hours of time difference - unless you still want to tar and feather me. :-)
jean
Christian Bischof wrote:
Jean, I would not want to go later than Feb. 13, i.e. give them the weekend. I will also be at a meeting next week Mo-Thurs. which limits my infrastructural possibilities some (but not totally :-)) - Chris
Jean Utke wrote:
Hi,
I briefly talked to Paul about this but since I hadn't seen a problem postponing the due date to begin with I am not sure what to tell him about delivering his revised version later. Chris and Shaun, since you voted for sticking to the 7th as I remember can you please let me know what to tell Paul (or send him e-mail directly)?
Thanks,
jean
Jean Utke Argonne National Lab./MCS utke@mcs.anl.gov phone: 630 252 4552 cell: 630 363 5753
On Mon, 6 Feb 2006, Paul Hovland wrote:
Dear AD2006 organizers,
Today we received reminders from Uwe that our revised papers are due tomorrow, Feb 7, and from the ICCS organizers that they are due Feb 19. The original conditional acceptance letter we received from Jean indicated that the deadline of Feb 7 was due to a Feb 10 final deadline imposed by the ICCS organizers. Since the ICCS organizers appear to have pushed this final date back to the 19th, will the AD2006 deadline be pushed back to Feb 16 (or, since 19 is a Sunday, perhaps Feb 15)? I'm not too worried about the Linearity paper with Michelle (although given all of my other commitments, a few extra days there wouldn't hurt either), but I'm a little worried about the Dynamic Analysis paper with Barbara Kreaseck, especially since Michelle and I haven't been able to devote much time to it. We will comply with the Feb 7 deadline if necessary, but 12 days for y'all to evaluate the revised version does seem a tad excessive.
Thanks for any clarification you can provide...
Paul
--
Prof. Christian Bischof, Ph.D.
Institute for Scientific Computing and Center for Computing and Communications
RWTH Aachen University
Seffenter Weg 23, 52074 Aachen, Germany
Tel. +49-241-8029110, Fax +49-241-8022241
bischof@rz.rwth-aachen.de <mailto:bischof@rz.rwth-aachen.de>, www.sc.rwth-aachen.de <http://www.sc.rwth-aachen.de/>, www.rz.rwth-aachen.de <http://www.rz.rwth-aachen.de/>
-- Jean Utke Argonne National Lab./MCS utke@mcs.anl.gov phone: 630 252 4552 cell: 630 363 5753
_______________________________________________ Org-ad-workshop mailing list Org-ad-workshop@lists.rwth-aachen.de http://mailman.rwth-aachen.de/mailman/listinfo/org-ad-workshop
-- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by the Cranfield MailScanner, and is believed to be clean.