RE: [gnso-trans-wg] FW: Transfers prioritization - a very small question...

[Olof Nordling <olof.nordling@xxxxxxxxx>]

Chuck,
Yes, you did indeed! I admire your telepathy skills....
Best

Olof

-----Original Message-----
From: Gomes, Chuck [mailto:cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: den 12 mars 2008 22:44
To: Olof Nordling; gnso-trans-wg@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [gnso-trans-wg] FW: Transfers prioritization - a very small 
question...

Sounds good to me, especially since that is what I think I already did
in the latest draft.

Chuck

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-gnso-trans-wg@xxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:owner-gnso-trans-wg@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Olof Nordling
> Sent: Wednesday, March 12, 2008 5:03 PM
> To: gnso-trans-wg@xxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [gnso-trans-wg] FW: Transfers prioritization - a
> very small question...
>
>
> Hi all,
> Regarding the "CT" issue, I just got confirmation from a most
> authoritative source - Ross himself - that this is a typo, see below.
> Accordingly, let's skip CT and use Consensus Ranking whenever
> we need to, in order to stay consistent with the prio group's
> vocabulary.
>
> Best regards
>
> Olof
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ross Rader [mailto:ross@xxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: den 12 mars 2008 18:54
> To: Olof Nordling
> Subject: Re: Transfers prioritization - a very small question...
>
> Hi Olof -
>
> I would guess that this is a typo that may have crept in somewhere.
> The group I worked with only discussed the "consensus
> rankings" - I don't have any recollection of anything that
> looked like "CT".
>
> Hope this helps!
>
> -ross
>
> On Mar 12, 2008, at 1:43 PM, Olof Nordling wrote:
>
> > Hi Ross,
> > A small group of volunteers is currently finalizing the work of
> > suggesting groupings of the "remaining" transfers issues, based on
> > your groups priority settings. In that work, we reference your
> > Consensus Rankings of the individual issues, but somehow they have
> > seeped into our document as, for example, CT 6.0, where I wonder
> > whether "CT" is just a misprint for "CR" or has some other
> > significance. I suppose the former, as I cannot find "CT" in your
> > earlier documents, but I would appreciate your confirmation or
> > comments on that.
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > Olof
>
>
>