From LPMeissner@msn.com Fri Aug 2 03:10:34 1996 Received: from upsmot02.msn.com (upsmot02.msn.com [204.95.110.79]) by dkuug.dk (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id DAA26629 for ; Fri, 2 Aug 1996 03:10:27 +0200 Received: from upmajb02.msn.com (upmajb02.msn.com [204.95.110.74]) by upsmot02.msn.com (8.6.8.1/Configuration 4) with SMTP id RAA24449 for ; Thu, 1 Aug 1996 17:08:40 -0700 Date: Fri, 2 Aug 96 01:05:57 UT From: "Loren Meissner" Message-Id: To: sc22wg5@dkuug.dk Subject: RE: (SC22WG5.1142) replaced agenda of Dresden meeting I have a copy of "D5". I think we covered all of the items on that agenda in one form or another, but not always in the order listed. Do you think that the Minutes should be reorganized according to Agenda item numbers? Or should an Agenda item number be added as a reference to each topic discussed, so that the same item number would appear again whenever the topic was discussed? I will be happy to do it either way. If I use Agenda item numbers according to the revised Agenda, I would agree that "D5" should be given a permanent N number. - Loren Meissner ---------- From: TAKATA Masayuki Sent: Thursday, August 01, 1996 16:07 To: SC22WG5@dkuug.dk Subject: (SC22WG5.1142) replaced agenda of Dresden meeting Miles, You distributed a document temporarily numbered as "D5", which is the slightly amended agenda of the Dresden meeting. IMO we should have an official "N" number of this, because we did follow this agenda, not the previous one. Namely, there should be Item 8.3. Are there any reasons why you didn't put a number? In the case, I'm happy if the minutes clearly describes the changes. Regards, Makki -------------------------- Takata, Masayuki Edogawa University, Nagareyama, Chiba, Japan