[STDS-802-11-EDITORS] FW: More info on NOTES

Thread Links	Date Links
Thread Prev	Thread Next	Thread Index	Date Prev	Date Next	Date Index

Robert and Hunter,

Regarding the numbering of NOTEs…

I got the following responses from IEEE-SA editorial staff: From Kim:

So, with that being said, she believes it is incorrect in the document and she agrees with [David Hunter]. That being said, if making things more precise causes real grief and you feel we should stick to the same style we've used in the base and any other amendments we have published so far, we can continue doing what we've been doing because our old guidelines were ambiguous and we haven't all been on the same page internally. So, there is no reason to re-invent the wheel now. This is something we can pay closer attention to during the next revision.

From Michelle:

Typically I use the style you use when formatting notes. If there is only one NOTE to the paragraph then there is no need to number it. If there are more than one to a paragraph within a subclause then they shall be numbered. Your right in 802.11 (i.e., NOTES are numbered when applying to a specific paragraph in a subclause and then if there are separate paragraphs within the subclause, requiring a new NOTE, we start the counter again). I am going to send your query and suggestion to Kim for clarification. But long story short, in the meantime I believe you should follow the same style you followed for the base.

My take from this is that amendments to 802.11-2012 should follow the style in that document (numbering sequence applies only

to a contiguous sequence of notes). We can discuss in REVmc whether to adopt the new style in that document (with the same requirement

on any amendments to REVmc).

Best Regards,

Adrian P STEPHENS

Tel: +44 (1793) 404825 (office)
Tel: +44 (7920) 084 900 (mobile, UK)

Tel: +1 (408) 2397485 (mobile, USA)

----------------------------------------------
Intel Corporation (UK) Limited
Registered No. 1134945 (England)
Registered Office: Pipers Way, Swindon SN3 1RJ
VAT No: 860 2173 47

From: Michelle Turner [mailto:m.d.turner@xxxxxxxx]
Sent: Friday, January 04, 2013 3:22 PM
To: Stephens, Adrian P
Subject: More info on NOTES

Hi Adrian,

I passed your query to Kim and I attached the following page from 802.11 to show her the style we used for 802.11.

"The Style Manual states clearly that multiple notes within a subclause should be numbered sequentially. He's introducing ambiguity into the mix by suggesting that each paragraph within a subclause might act like a de facto subclause. It doesn't.

5.1.3

blahblahblah

NOTE 1--
NOTE 2--

blahblahblahblah

NOTE 3--
NOTE 4--

The reason is for referencing. If you were to say see NOTE 2 in 5.1.3, there should only be one NOTE 2 in 5.1.3."

So, with that being said, she believes it is incorrect in the document and she agrees with the 802.11ac editor. That being said, if making things more precise causes real grief and you feel we should stick to the same style we've used in the base and any other amendments we have published so far, we can continue doing what we've been doing because our old guidelines were ambiguous and we haven't all been on the same page internally. So, there is no reason to re-invent the wheel now. This is something we can pay closer attention to during the next revision.

--
Michelle Turner
Sr. Program Manager, Document Development
IEEE Standards Association
e-mail: m.d.turner@xxxxxxxx
PH: +1 732 562 3825; FAX: +1 732 562 1571

IF YOU WISH to be Removed from this reflector, PLEASE DO NOT send your request to this CLOSED reflector. We use this valuable tool to communicate on the issues at hand.