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

Re: [STDS-802-11-TGAK] Acronym collision



There are 69 instances of “ISS” in D3.   You could change it

to something like “InSS”,  but if you do that,  you should also change “RSS” to “ReSS”.    The abbreviation is used also in the names of certain fields.

 

If it’s not too much pain,  I would avoid using the abbreviation ISS in TGak and always spell it out in full,  but accept ISS_SAP as distinct from ISS.

 

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: Hamilton, Mark [mailto:Mark.Hamilton@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Saturday, December 13, 2014 10:18 PM
To: STDS-802-11-TGAK@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [STDS-802-11-TGAK] Acronym collision

 

All,  (Copying the old TGad mailing list, in hopes of getting some expert advice from those members…)

 

On a recent TGmc call, I realized that we are working into an acronym collision, and probably need to think about this.

 

The acronym “ISS” was introduced into 802.11 with 11ad, for “initiator sector sweep”, part of the beamforming training process.

 

If 11ak wants to bring ISS into 802.11, as the 802.1 acronym for Internal Sublayer Service, we need to be careful about the ambiguous acronyms.

 

I note that 802.1Q-2012 actually defines ISS-SAP to be the instance access point of the ISS service, which I think is the term we’re actually using in 11ak.  So, I think it would be more correct to change where we have ISS to be ISS-SAP in most (if not all) places where we use it.  (And, if that is not all the occurrences, perhaps we can word around the others.)  Does the group think this is right, and do we think “ISS-SAP” and “ISS” are okay to both be used in the Standard (for very different things) without ambiguity/confusion?

 

Mark

_______________________________________________________________________________

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-TGAK 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.

SELF SERVICE OPTION: Point your Browser to - http://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-11-TGAK 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 _______________________________________________________________________________