Newsgroups: comp.org.usenix
Path: utzoo!henry
From: henry@utzoo.uucp (Henry Spencer)
Subject: Re: First impressions
Message-ID: <1989Jul6.163054.558@utzoo.uucp>
Organization: U of Toronto Zoology
References: <444@warlock.UUCP> <1815@ucsd.EDU> <15898@vail.ICO.ISC.COM>
Date: Thu, 6 Jul 89 16:30:54 GMT

In article <15898@vail.ICO.ISC.COM> rcd@ico.ISC.COM (Dick Dunn) writes:
>... the Baltimore CFP
>asked for full papers by the submission deadline; I believe that San Diego
>had allowed for extended abstracts and I know that the upcoming DC needs
>only abstracts...

Unfortunately, there is a problem here.  Judging submissions based on less
than full papers does make things easier for submitters... but it makes
things harder for the program committee.  It is almost impossible to judge
the quality of a paper from an abstract.  DC wants extended abstracts, which
improves the situation, but it can still make life difficult (especially
since people confuse "extended abstract" with "abstract" -- I urged,
and urge again, that that phrase be changed to something less misleading,
like "incomplete papers").  San Diego got a mixture of completed papers
and extended abstracts, which mostly weren't that bad to deal with, but
there were cases where some of us had reservations because the extended
abstract was a bit too abstract.
-- 
$10 million equals 18 PM       |     Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology
(Pentagon-Minutes). -Tom Neff  | uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry henry@zoo.toronto.edu