# ========================================================================== #
#                                                                            #
# IF YOU PLAN TO SUBMIT YOUR REVIEW USING THIS FORM, PLEASE DO SO WITH CARE  #
# TO EASE THE AUTOMATIC PROCESSING OF YOUR REVIEW. IF YOU HAVE CO-REVIEWERS, #
# PLEASE FORWARD THE COMPLETE REVIEW FORM, MAKING SURE THAT NO LINES ARE     #
# WRAPPED.                                                                   #
# ========================================================================== #
#
# This is the offline review form for Papers of MyConference 2002,
# submission 253, titled
# "CyberChairPRO: A PC Chairs Best Friend"
#
# Please submit completed off-line review forms via your reviewer page.
# If you leave fields empty, a warning is shown, but the review is stored
# anyway.
#
# Authors will receive responses to questions 5 and 6 only;
# responses to other questions 1-4 and 7 will NOT be sent to the authors.
#
# Fill in question 7 only if you sollicited a review from someone else.
#   
# The lines that MUST be in the review form are the lines that contain the
# CAPITALIZED keywords. All lines starting with the '#'-character will
# be discarded.
#
# The first keyword of a review form is REVIEWER-NAME.
# The last line of a review is the line '%%%% END OF FORM %%%%'.
#
# This is the offline review form for Papers of MyConference 2002,
# submission 253, titled
# "CyberChairPRO: A PC Chair's Best Friend"
#
# Don't change the following 3 lines:
#
REVIEWER-NAME: Some Reviewer
REVIEWER-NUMBER: 151
PAPER-NUMBER: 253
#
# 1 - How do you classify this paper? (NOT sent to the authors)
# A: I will champion this paper at the PC meeting
#    (advocate/accept).
# B: I can accept this paper, but I will not champion it
#    (accept, but could reject).
# C: This paper should be rejected, though I will not fight strongly
#    against it (reject, but could accept).
# D: Serious problems. I will argue to reject this paper
#    (detractor).
# (Fill in after the keyword: A, B, C or D)
CLASSIFICATION:
#
# 2 - What is your overall expertise concerning the subject areas of
#     this paper? (NOT sent to the authors)
# X: I am an expert;
# Y: I am knowledgable in the area, though not an expert;
# Z: I am not an expert. My evaluation is that of an informed outsider.
# (Fill in after the keyword: X, Y or Z)
REVIEWER-EXPERTISE:
#
# 3 - Relevance for the conference (NOT sent to the authors)
# S: Significantly Relevant
# R: Relevant
# M: Marginal Relevant
# (Fill in after the keyword: S, R or M)
RELEVANCE:
#
# 4 - Comments for the program committee (NOT sent to the authors)
# (Type after and/or below the keyword)
COMMITTEE-COMMENTS: 
#
# 5 - Summary of the submission (sent to the authors)
# (Type after and/or below the keyword)
SUMMARY:
#
# 6 - Evaluation of the submission, including points in favor and
#     against, and comments for improvement (sent to the authors)
# (Type after and/or below the keyword)
EVALUATION:
#
# 7 - First and last name of the co-reviewer(s) for this paper
#     (included in the proceedings, one per line, no affiliation)
# (Type after and/or below the keyword, leave blank if not applicable)
CO-REVIEWERS:
#
%%%% END OF FORM %%%%