Fwd: re[2]: Your TechDoc session(s)

[Lofton Henderson <lofton@rockynet.com>]

CGMO TC-ers: We thought this development on TechDoc would be interesting, 
as it was a Cologne topic and part of our program...

>Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2004 12:28:36 -0500
>From: Don Larson <dlarson@cgmlarson.com>
>Subject: re[2]: Your TechDoc session(s)
>To: Lofton Henderson <lofton@rockynet.com>
>Organization: Larson Software Technology
>X-Mailer: GoldMine [5.00.041]
>X-Qmail-Scanner-Message-ID: <108809782352632555@cgmlarson.com>
>X-IMAIL-SPAM-VALREVDNS: (10f506fe00221d17)
>X-RCPT-TO: <lofton@rockynet.com>
>X-SpamCatcher-Score: 1
>X-SpamCatcher-IP: 127.0.0.1
>X-SpamCatcher-1: 8f397a9bd2c7e389ba86b9a8b199a02d
>
>Lofton,
>
>
>   > Hi Don
>
>   > At 04:57 PM 6/22/2004 -0500, Don Larson wrote:
>   > >[...]
>   > >Unfortunately the TechDoc workshop was postponed because of
>   > >insufficient pre-registration.
>
>   > Bummer!
>
>   > Do they have any idea why it failed to get the numbers?  Bad timing?  Or
>   > more fundamental problem?  Such as....
>I was disappointed too.  Here's the official statement from the TechDoc 
>organizer:
>---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>I regret to announce that our TechDoc Summer Workshops event has been
>postponed by IDEAlliance. They report that the attendance as of Friday was
>not acceptable based on their model for these types of events.
>
>There's no telling whether the lack of a favorable response was because of
>the date (the week before 4th of July) or the location (muggy Washington
>DC), or the venue (The Marriott has not been very cooperative in offering
>the negotiated rate), or the marketing effort (did people even know there
>was an event?). Another possibility might have been the lack of lead time in
>the announcement which did not allow possible attendees to budget for the
>workshops and the required travel. Postponing the event will give us more
>time.
>
>I know there are people out there who are interested in the topic; our
>webinars filled up in just a couple of days, and the list of companies that
>signed up is an impressive one.
>
>Over the next few weeks, we will re-evaluate our marketing plan for this
>event and try to figure out why the response was low.
>
>For now, IDEAlliance is working with the hotel to find another date,
>probably in the winter, when people's vacation schedule might be more
>appropriate to an event such as this.
>
>So, for now, please accept my gratitude for all the work you have put into
>this event. It will not go to waste; I expect that we will have another date
>shortly, and we can start planning for that.
>
>For now, we will continue the other activities of the TechDoc Network,
>including the webinars that are scheduled. I will also start the process of
>firing up the TechDoc Network Forum, which I was going to pitch at the
>Workshops event.
>
>Again, thank you all for your help. I'll keep you posted!
>
>Brian.
>----
>Brian E. Travis, Chief Technical Officer    Architag International
>-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>   > >They are going to try again later this year.
>
>   > I wonder if TechDoc is interesting enough to be viable on its 
> own?  Or if,
>   > rather, it needs to be attached to another thing, like Seybold or XML 
> (U.S.   > or Europe) or ...?
>
>That may be true. Having it run concurrently with XML or included in the
>XML program would probably be better.  I know a lot of the TechDoc people
>attend the XML conference.
>
>   > Have they speculated about where/when?
>
>   > Thanks for staying involved.
>
>Don..
>
>
>   > Cheers,
>   > -Lofton.