See my section of the white paper for a revised introduction to the entire trespass paper.

I was not sure how the sections of part II of our paper should be numbered, so I just referred to them as parts IIA - IIE.

-Kristina

-- Anonymous, November 28, 1998

Answers

Hi all. Check out the Whitepaper page table of contents for how it's going (in my mind) so far. Email with comments.

-- Anonymous, November 29, 1998

Kristina and Lydia, both of your stuff looks good.

Just a note to everyone (and ignore me if you've already talked about this; I may have missed it) -- If the presentation part of our whitepaper is supposed to be 40 pages, that leaves 60 pages for the new stuff. That's 10 pages a person. Obviously there's some leeway, but keep that figure in mind as you write!

Also keep in mind the citation recommendations in my post above -- it really will make your life and my life a lot easier in the end. Thanks.

- Michelle.

-- Anonymous, November 29, 1998

the table of contents and the introduction look good. we might want to break the organization up into two main sections - one for the old stuff and one for the new stuff. sort of group sections ii - v under one big heading in order to emphasize the new architecture more... what do you think?

also, i really like michelle's idea of evaluating the possible trespass examples using our architecture. i think we should add that in.

-- Anonymous, November 29, 1998

(1) Okay, I disagree that we should have two entirely separate parts of our paper. I thought we were doing past-present-future. I thought this was more coherent than "presentation" and "not presentation." I don't know how, then, Kristina's "introduction for future section of presentation part of paper" comes in. Why would we have that future section at all? I don't think I'm understanding this. Has this already been decided? Just let me know and I'll change it.

(2) From what I understood about what Ben told me, the possible trespasses within the architecture are in the projections and evaluation section. Please let me know if I'm wrong.

-- Anonymous, November 29, 1998

My "intro to future section" is something I talked to Lauren about and agreed to do for our part of the paper which links to the presentation.

I agree that our paper should be organized in a more coherent way than "presentation" or "not presentation." I hope that we can fit this "intro to future section" somewhere in our paper, hopefully as an introduction to Lauren's section and a preview of the concepts in the Calabresi and Melamed article. That was my intent when I wrote it.

-Kris :)

-- Anonymous, November 29, 1998

I changed the table of contents to reflect what I thought people were saying. Please comment.

By the way, I've put the Executive Summary at the end; I think it would be nice to hand it in with the paper in case people want something to read but don't have time to read 100 pages. Sort of like an abstract only longer.

-- Anonymous, November 30, 1998