Greetings all,

I know I said I'd get back to everyone in a week, but I got caught up in
writing this pesky thing called a thesis.

My thanks to everyone who sent me feedback on the proposed newsgroup name. The
number of responses I received was encouraging. In terms of preferences, 10
liked the idea of sci.engr.micromachining, 3 liked microsystems, and
microdevices was also put forward.

There were also a couple of comments that micromachining might lead people to
believe the group was strictly about techniques for fabricating structures, and
that sci.engr.micromachines might be a possibility. However, micromachines
really addresses actuators, not sensors. In any event, the process we've gone
through on our mailing lists was merely to come up with the best compromise to
introduce to the Usenet community as a whole. While there were a number of good
arguments put forward for all names, I have decided to stay with the
micromachining name to present to the Usenet community.

In a perfect world we could have a microsystem hierarchy with as many
descriptive groups as we wanted.

Sci.engr.microsystems.mems
Sci.engr.microsystems.mst
Sci.engr.microsystems.mechatronics
Sci.engr.microsystems.sensors
Sci.engr.microsystems.actuators.

and the list could go on. However, to create a news group we have to
demonstrate that we can generate reasonable traffic. Since this is a new
subhierarchy we are proposing, we can only reasonably create one group. I
believe, and this was echoed by others, that micromachining is the best
compromise that will bring in people who aren't already subscribed to the three
mailing lists. Later, if a need is demonstrated, we could either rename the
group or split the group up into further sub- hierarchies.

I posted the Request for Discussion on news.groups tonight, so it should be
showing up on your news server by Thursday or Friday if not sooner. If you
weren't happy with the naming convention, i.e. you think we should be one
hierarchy up (sci.micromachining), or you didn't like "micromachining", then
news.groups will be the place to discuss your ideas. Whatever you do, though,
express support for the creation of the group itself. The more people that can
post support the better.

If there happens to be an obvious majority of people who want the name
microsystems instead (once we open discussion up to the Usenet community as a
whole), then the procedure is to issue a second Request for Discussion
reflecting that choice.

I'll keep the lists up to date on what's happening, but in one month (if
nothing about the group has changed) a Call For Votes will be issued. Remember
that we need 100 more YES votes than No votes, and 2/3 of the votes must be YES
votes, so make sure you get all your students, colleagues, etc. to vote when
the time comes (provided, of course, they are interested in micromachining).

In the mean time, we have to come up with an embryonic Frequently Asked
Questions. This is where I think I'll need the most help from people on the
mailing lists. If nothing else, to proof what I write for technical
correctness, but to make contributions as well

One thing I plan to do (bit by bit) is to go through the MEMS Clearinghouse
archives and copy out info there that is appropriate. This would be
particularly useful for those questions on: "Where can I find such and such a
product or service". Of course, the FAQ would carry a caveat that no-one is
responsible for any information copied to the FAQ and posted, and that it is
for reference purposes only, but I'm getting ahead of myself. We have to get
the group passed first.

Regards,

-Chris
--
.+'''+. |Christopher Raum - craum@robinhood.engg.uregina.ca|
R A U M |Faculty of Engineering, University of Regina      |
`+.,.+' |Regina, Saskatchewan, S4S-0A2, Canada             |
        |Tel: (306)565-2960 Fax: (306)585-4855             |