Also, The Fourth International Conference on Origami in Science, Mathematics, and Education (4OSME) is taking place this weekend at CalTech, and there's still time to sign up. I haven't yet decided whether to go but it looks like there'll be a lot of interesting talks.
I went to the plenary sessions of 40SME and listened to Professor Demaine speak. Very nice. But there's something that bothered me about his talk. When he spoke about the fold-and-cut problem, he did not reference your paper with himself, Bern, you, and Hayes. Rather he spoke about a later work. What's the story with that? Wasn't that the first proof? Couldn't he have worked in a citation?
Erik and my other coauthors are (last I heard) in some disagreement over the correctness of some details in that paper. Probably he found it most politic to avoid bringing it up. Anyway, the straight skeleton proof was earlier.
The Pig? I take it that's someone different from the Mudder with the pig icon?
Thanks for the reply. I have gone through your excellent disk-packing paper a few times, and followed everything up until the edge-matching part. Then things get hazy. Of course, it's a hard problem and I'm not terribly bright. However, if I had to guess where the details in disagreement over the correctness of the paper lay, I'd surmise there.
No, I'm not The Mudder. Only a pig.
To continue the story from my previous comment: my coauthors at 4OSME (I didn't go) seem to have re-convinced themselves of the correctness of the circle-packing construction. But in the process the priority for solving the problem has become more confused, because apparently circle packing works for a larger class of inputs than the earlier straight skeleton method — there is an issue where the folds from the straight skeleton can reflect around the sheet in an infinite sequence rather than converging to a finite fold set.