Thread Links | Date Links | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Thread Prev | Thread Next | Thread Index | Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index |
--- This message came from the IEEE 802.11 Task Group M Technical Reflector ---
Hi Adrian, The results of my review are attached. Thanks, Dorothy From: Stephens, Adrian P [mailto:Adrian.P.Stephens@xxxxxxxxx]
Dear reviewers, If you have sent your findings to me, many thanks. If you have not sent your findings to me, today is the deadline. Best Regards, Adrian P STEPHENS Tel: +44 (1793) 404825 (office) Tel: +1 (408) 2397485 (mobile, USA) ---------------------------------------------- From: Stephens, Adrian P
Dear all, Now is the time for the D3.3 review kickoff.
The deadline for the review is Monday 10th November (2 weeks from now). There are three classes of folks addressed here: 1.
Volunteer reviewers (Dorothy, Peter and MikeM) 2.
First listed submission authors 3.
Editors I have assigned all technical comments associated with a submission to the first author for reviewing, split the remaining technical comments among the three volunteers. The editorials have been assigned so that ED_A reviews ED_Q’s work and vice versa, and my edits are split between them for review. Except for the technical for review (Submission Authors), each review has a separate tab (comment group). Here is a summary of the totals – only yellow highlight is relevant
For the technical submissions, I’d ask the first author to review, or find a replacement:
The attached contains the comments, resolutions, edit notes and a tab for your findings. Instructions: The redline suffers from artefacts resulting from the frame-maker comparison process (see
the redline notes at the start of the redline draft). If you find a problem in the redline, locate it first in the clean draft before reporting it. Fill in any defects you observe in the defects spreadsheet supplied and email your copy of
this spreadsheet to your technical editor as soon as you have finished your assignment. How to report Defects For each defect fill in a new row of the defect spreadsheet. The columns of the spreadsheet are:
Please fill in as much data as necessary. But there is no need to slavishly fill in all
the fields. Just provide enough detail to make it unambiguous. If you find yourself spending a lot of time reporting a systematic error, it may save you
time to discuss with the editor whether this is actually an issue first. Please read the Editor’s Notes at the start of the draft. They explain the use of tags and
cross-reference styles. These have provoked unnecessary review comments in the past. Also, please note that when a tag appears in a cross-reference caption (e.g. 7.2 (Ice-cream
vendors(#1234)), it will appear as plain (i.e., not green) text. There’s nothing I can do to change this. Please do not report this as a defect. Goals of the review The goals of this review are to answer the questions:
Non-Goals The following is not a goal of the review:
Best Regards, Adrian P STEPHENS Tel: +44 (1793) 404825 (office) Tel: +1 (408) 2397485 (mobile, USA) ---------------------------------------------- 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-TGM 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 _______________________________________________________________________________ |
Attachment:
P802.11REVmc_D3.3_review-DS-comments.xlsx
Description: P802.11REVmc_D3.3_review-DS-comments.xlsx