Subject: CPANDE Date: Thu, 18 Mar 1999 19:26:50 -0500 From: Geoffrey Fox Organization: Syracuse University To: kea@npac.syr.edu New submissions C404 405 406 407 408 Accepted C345 C406 TODO: Referee Report on Web Copyright Transfer on Web Syntax of Concurrency:Practice and Experience Letters Dear Authors: We enclose N referee report(s) on your paper Cnnn: Title DECISION. IF OK then RESUBMITTAL DETAILS Then say We thank you for your interest in Concurrency: Practice and Experience. If DECISION OK follow this with We are trying to speed up publication which has been delayed recently by several good but disruptive (to timely publication!) special issues. Currently we aim at publication of new papers within a year and accepted papers received in next month will be published towards the end of summer 99. Enclose referee reports labelled 1 2 ... (remember which report is labelled by what number). Reports should NOT have any hint as to source of report and should NOT have recommended action Send email to gcf after ALL letters describing exactly what was done and with electronic copies of leters (as say word attachments) __________________________________________________________________ C396 Editors Letter N=1 (Berman) DECISION OK We would be pleased to publish without further refereeing your interesting paper if you could make the minor suggested improvements. (Or explain why they are not appropriate!) RESUBMITTAL DETAILS Included above _________________________________________________________________________ C392(Additional Report) This is an interesting professional paper which fits well the spirit of the journal. I would have liked to see some explicit discussion of the relevance (if any) of the research to Java and the server and client applications typically coded in this language. C392 Editors Letter N=2(Fox, Pudshoorn) DECISION OK The reports are not entirely consistent but we believe that this is a fine paper which we would like to publish after RESUBMITTAL DETAILS Please include a discussion of your changes and their answer to the referees in your resubmittal. If this is persuasive, we can publish without further refereeing. ________________________________________________________________________ C393(Additional Report) This paper is perhaps most important because of its emphasis on instruction -- an area that deserves more attention. As such, I believe that the "practice and experience" nature of journal suggests that it should have some discussion of experience in instructional use. The authors claim many universities have tried it. Was it a success? How was it used? What level courses? ....etc..... C393 Editors Letter N=2(Fox, Thiruvathukal) DECISION OK The reports are not entirely consistent but we believe that you can easily make your paper acceptable for publication. In general we find style satifactory but we wish that the title was more mundane and descriptive. (Distributed BACI: An instructional toolkit for distributed applications perhaps). Please do improve references to others! RESUBMITTAL DETAILS Please include a discussion of your changes and their answer to the referees in your resubmittal. If this is persuasive, we can publish without further refereeing. _____________________________________________________________________ C394 Editors Letter N=1 (Sunderam) DECISION OK We will be pleased to publish your excellent paper either as it is or with changes suggested by referee or consequent from the passage of time. RESUBMITTAL DETAILS None