Re: PAC: Schedule and AIs for this cycle

[Terry Allen <tallen@sonic.net>]

Jon wrote:
| [Robin Cover:]
| 
| | Why "business days"?  Suppose it's Fri-Sat-Sun?  (viz., are
| | weekend days "business days"?)
| 
| No, they're not -- and that's the point.  I think I picked up the
| phrase "business days" from Robert's.  My first impulse was to
| replace it with something more precise: weekdays.  But then I
| thought, No, what about holidays.  But the definition of "holiday"
| is going to be different depending on where you are... So the more
| I thought about it, the more I realized (a) that "business days"
| is precisely the legal phrase for the concept we want, and (b)
| that its slight ambiguity (or shall we say, context-sensitivity)
| is necessary to accommodate cultural differences.

What about the case where Wednesday is a holiday in France,
Thursday a holiday in England, and neither is holiday in the U.S.?

| Oddly, the term "business day" is not defined in any of my large
| dictionaries, but having just been through several months of
| househunting during which I've plowed through multiple sets of
| real estate contracts, I can testify that the concept of a
| "business day" is quite well established.

In any given jurisdiction, yes.  

| | "immediate succession"  -  What if a TC meets Fri, Sun, and 
| | Tues of a conference week?
| 
| Then you fall through to the considerably more complicated rules
| governing the meaning of a "session" in Robert's.  The language
| I'm suggesting merely makes explicit the simple rule governing the
| easy case: if the meeting adjourns to the business day immediately
| following, you're still in the same session.  The case where other
| business days intervene is much harder, but it's all covered in
| Robert's.

Where?  pp. 82-89 do not appear to be more specfic than that 
a session is a meeting or series of connected meetings (p. 83 top).



regards, Terry