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

Re: [STDS-802-11-TGBE] Discussion on CR doc 252r1 - use of "shall be able to"

Gaurag,

Thanks for the explanation. However as I look through Clause 11.1.4 of IEEE 802.11-2020 which deals with acquiring synchonization and scanning, the requirements seem predominantly to use "may". Therefore I believe "may"  should be used to remain consistent with similar behaviour.

So I would recommend that we use "may" instead of "shall be able to". But I could be convinced if others justify the use of  "can".

In the standard, there are 2595 occurrences of "may", 1426 occurrences of "can", and only 24 occurrences of "shall be able to"

Cheers,

Mike

On Fri, Feb 26, 2021 at 5:59 PM Venkatesan, Ganesh <ganesh.venkatesan@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Hello Gaurang:

 

I believe in all the instances you identify below, the intent/meaning will remain the same if ‘shall be able to’ is replaced with ‘shall’.

 

Cheers --

ganesh

“It is amazing what you can accomplish if you don’t care who gets the credit.” – Harry Truman

 

 

From: Gaurang Naik <gnaik@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Friday, February 26, 2021 2:10 PM
To: STDS-802-11-TGBE@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [STDS-802-11-TGBE] Discussion on CR doc 252r1 - use of "shall be able to"

 

Hi All,

 

Thank you for providing valuable feedback during the call on Feb 25.

 

Several members had reservations during the call on the use of “shall be able to” in subclause 35.3.4.3 (Non-AP behavior) of 252r1. I am initiating this discussion to gather more feedback.

 

When searching for the normative verb in REVmd 5.0 and 11ax D8.0, I found several examples of the use of “shall be able to”. I have cited a few examples below:

  • REVmd5.0 P783,L7: “A STA shall be able to properly construct a subset of the frames specified in this clause for transmission and to decode a (potentially different) subset of the frames specified in this clause upon validation following reception.”
  • REVmd5.0 P1717,L34: “ … a non-DMG STA shall be able to interpret Control frames with the Subtype subfield equal to RTS or CTS, and a DMG STA shall be able to interpret Control frames with the Subtype subfield equal to RTS or DMG CTS.”
  • REVmd5.0 P1842,L57: “A QoS STA shall be able to process received QoS Data frames with subtypes that include +CF-Ack …”
  • 11axD8.0 P479,L14: “A STA that is operating in an HE BSS ... shall be able to receive at each of the <HE-MCS, NSS> tuple values indicated by the Supported HE-MCS and NSS Set field in the HE Capabilities parameter of the MLMESTART.request primitive.”
  • 11axD8.0 P498,L42: “The non-AP STA shall be able to receive its intended spatial streams in a DL MU-MIMO transmission with a total number of spatial streams across all users of at least 4.”

 

Based on the above, since the statements in clause 35.3.4 are in similar contexts I am inclined to keep the normative verb in the subclause as-is, i.e., keep the “shall be able to”. Kindly let me know your thoughts.

 

Thanks,

Gaurang

To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-11-TGBE list, click the following link: https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-11-TGBE&A=1

To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-11-TGBE list, click the following link: https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-11-TGBE&A=1

To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-11-TGBE list, click the following link: https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-11-TGBE&A=1