From owner-sc22wg5@open-std.org Tue Aug 31 06:46:09 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sc22wg5-dom8 Delivered-To: sc22wg5-dom8@www2.open-std.org Received: by www2.open-std.org (Postfix, from userid 521) id 829C0C178E1; Tue, 31 Aug 2010 06:46:09 +0200 (CET DST) X-Original-To: sc22wg5@open-std.org Delivered-To: sc22wg5@open-std.org Received: from ns.nag-j.co.jp (218-42-159-107.cust.bit-drive.ne.jp [218.42.159.107]) by www2.open-std.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BFBA3C178DC for ; Tue, 31 Aug 2010 06:46:07 +0200 (CET DST) Received: from 218-42-159-108.cust.bit-drive.ne.jp ([218.42.159.108] helo=Maru6) by ns.nag-j.co.jp with smtp (Exim 4.50) id 1OqIhp-0001h1-Pt for sc22wg5@open-std.org; Tue, 31 Aug 2010 13:44:22 +0900 Message-ID: <30E6B2F1DB5848C18342B18A3FF5E8DF@Maru6> From: "Malcolm Cohen" To: "WG5" References: <4C76A33E.50607@moene.org> <20100827091756.B2517C3BA09@www2.open-std.org><20100831012332.9A765C178E5@www2.open-std.org> <20100831035254.CF5F3C178D9@www2.open-std.org> In-Reply-To: <20100831035254.CF5F3C178D9@www2.open-std.org> Subject: Re: [ukfortran] (SC22WG5.4318) (j3.2006) The joint J3/WG5 meeting in the Netherlands, 2013 - which week of June ? Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2010 13:46:05 +0900 Organization: ??NAG MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=response Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Importance: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Windows Live Mail 14.0.8117.416 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V14.0.8117.416 Sender: owner-sc22wg5@open-std.org Precedence: bulk Bill Long wrote: > The meeting date formula I mentioned is used to schedule J3 meetings. Since > all WG5 meetings are co-scheduled with J3 meetings, I suggested it for the WG5 > meetings as well. We can always change the formula for the June meeting. For > me the first week of June is bad (every year), but the week containing the 4th > Wednesday is fine. We can discuss this as a general change for J3 meetings at > the October meeting. While J3 can change its own general formula around all it likes, I don't think it is necessary, at least for the 2013 meeting. For 2011 the formula is already wrong (but see below). We've always done WG5 meetings on a case by case basis. I see no reason to change that, and plenty of reasons not to. Of course there is nothing particular magic about June. In the past we've had the "summer" WG5 meeting in May, June, July and August. Usually the host country has some limitations on when they can provide the meeting, and we just make our best attempt to pick a week that they can provide and which gets the best attendance. Hmm, I notice the WG5 web site still only says "probably" for the 2011 meeting. I thought this was sorted out? - there is nothing about probability in resolution LV8. There is "probably" more need to fix the date of the 2012 meeting than the 2013 one! I assume that we will do that next year too. Cheers, -- ................................Malcolm Cohen, Nihon NAG, Tokyo.