Let me add to this discussion thread.
I start with some axioms:
·
n% of everything I do is utter rubbish.
·
I always make the same mistake twice.
·
“Paris in the the spring” is always correct until someone shows you the error.
·
n% of everything done by others is also utter rubbish.
We can argue about the “n”. When editing the changes from a hundred comments, that might touch hundreds of locations in the text,
my reviewers might find ~50 defects.
The burden to edit correctly falls ultimately on the editor. He can and should take into mind the axioms above
and find a way to reduce his undetected error rate by involving those around him or her.
TGmc has a review process, where we call for volunteers, and assign approved resolutions to volunteers to be checked. The editor
then considers each reported defect in turn and resolves it without further interaction from the group.
We recently changed to a new model whereby submission authors review changes in their submissions,
and comments not related to submissions are checked by an editor that did not do the original editing. We can
do that because we now (temporarily) have the luxury of 3 editors, and that is probably the motivation for the switch.
You should, as a group, not be surprised if your editor comes back with the comment “this is complete rubbish, I can’t understand
a word”, or “this resolution conflicts with the resolution of comment xyz, and I don’t know what to do”. This is to be expected given my Axiom 4 above.
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: *** 802.11 TGai - Fast Initial Link Set-Up *** [mailto:STDS-802-11-TGAI@xxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Dan Harkins
Sent: 11 December 2014 17:23
To: STDS-802-11-TGAI@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [STDS-802-11-TGAI] Response to CID 6806
TGm has a system whereby the correct implementation of agreed changes
is verified by someone other than the editor(s). It seems to me that
TGai needs to adopt a similar system, and needs to apply it to D3.0
to determine whether any other motion/resolution was missed or
In the spirit of "no good deed goes unpunished" I nominate Mark Rison
to be the "someone other than the editor(s)" to verify correct implementation
of agreed changes for TGai.
P.S.: I've found another one, searching for "CID<digit>": CIDs 6089
to 6094 assert CID 4436 was not applied.
Fantastic! Keep up the good work.
_______________________________________________________________________________
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.
SELF SERVICE OPTION: Point your Browser to -
http://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-11-TGAI and then amend your subscription on the form provided. If you require removal from the reflector press the LEAVE button.
Further information can be found at:
http://www.ieee802.org/11/Email_Subscribe.html _______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
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.