|
5038
|
|
|
|
The "Action field format" tables are inconsistent in their interpretation as to the meaning of the "Information" field. Either it names
"a field" which might contain a field, an element, or multiple of them. (e.g. the "Relay Status Code" field contains a Status Code); or the name of the field is absent, and it identifies the information that goes into it (e.g. "one or more elements").
|
Recommend that this be discussed and see if a simple fix to create a single interpretation is possible.
For example, to make the Information hold "[Name: ][field|element]".
This would entail adding missing when the information holds the definition of a new name, and adding field or element to every entry that does not have it.
Furthermore, many of these tables are followed by a list of "the xyz field is defined in ".
These could be combined into the table by moving the xref into the information column, e.g. in parens after field or element. So "Category" becomes "Category (8.4.1.11)". Or we could add a new column for that purpose. So, in 8.6.20.15, "Destination Status Code"
would become "Destination Status Code: Status Code field (optional)"
|
|
EDITOR
|
|
5159
|
|
General
|
|
The use of "binary" encoding is to be treated with suspicion because:
1. Bitstrings and binary representations are often confused - and their representations are very different
2. Quoting magic numbers in the body text should be minimized
|
Review all use of "binary". When used to define the encoding of an integer field, replace with decimal.
When used to either insert or test a value in an integer field, replace with either the decimal value, or (where possible) the name of the value, and introduce names for enumeration values if none exist.
|
|
EDITOR
|
|
5249
|
80.37
|
4.3.16.1
|
|
WNM-Notification is a capability, not a frame, field, element, etc., so its name does not require initial caps. In addition, similarly
to "U-APSD coexistence", this name does not need a hyphen.
|
When "WNM-Notification" is part of the name of a frame, field, element, etc. replace it with "WNM Notification" throughout the draft. Otherwise
(such as line 37), replace it with "WNM notification" throughout the draft.
|
|
EDITOR
|
|
5250
|
80.37
|
4.3.16.1
|
|
Similarly to the name "U-APSD coexistence", "WNM-sleep mode" does not need a hyphen.
|
Replace "WNM-sleep mode" with "WNM sleep mode" throughout the draft.
|
|
EDITOR
|
|
5310
|
738.35
|
8.4.2.20.6
|
|
"A Yes in the Extensible column": but what is in the column is "Yes" (in quotes because that is the symbol that is actually in the column).
|
Replace 'A Yes in the Extensible' with 'A "Yes" in the Extensible'.
|
See cid 5311.
|
EDITOR
|
|
5311
|
738.37
|
8.4.2.20.6
|
|
What could it possibly mean to say: "When the Extensible column of an element is equal to Subelements, then the subelement might be extended
..."? What element has a column in it? When is a column equal to one or more subelements? One might guess that the reference is to a column that has a "Subelement" entry in it; however, a search doesn't turn up any "Subelement" entry in a cell in a column
named "Extensible" of any table in clause 7.
|
If the intent is to say that the subelement whose name is in the row that contains "Yes" in the column headed "Extensible" is itself extensible,
then say that more clearly. Otherwise delete this sentence.
|
Globally Replace text that is similar to this "A Yes in the Extensible column of a subelement listed in Table 8- indicates that the subelement
might be extended infuture revisions or amendments of this standard. When the Extensible column of an element is equal to Subelements, then the subelement might be extended in future revisions or amendments of this standard by defining additional subelements
within the subelement. See 9.27.9 (Extensible subelement parsing)."
TODO: make precise & find other comments related.
with
"The interpretation of the "Extensible" column is defined in 9.27.9."
|
EDITOR
|
|
5318
|
741.39
|
8.4.2.20.7
|
|
"A Yes in the Extensible column": but what is in the column is "Yes" (in quotes because that is the symbol that is actually in the column).
|
Replace 'A Yes in the Extensible' with 'A "Yes" in the Extensible'.
|
|
EDITOR
|
|
5319
|
741.41
|
8.4.2.20.7
|
|
What could it possibly mean to say: "When the Extensible column of an element is equal to Subelements, then the subelement might be extended
..."? What element has a column in it? When is a column equal to one or more subelements? One might guess that the reference is to a column that has a "Subelement" entry in it; however, a search doesn't turn up any "Subelement" entry in a cell in a column
named "Extensible" of any table in clause 7.
|
If the intent is to say that the subelement whose name is in the row that contains "Yes" in the column headed "Extensible" is itself extensible,
then say that more clearly. Otherwise delete this sentence.
|
|
EDITOR
|
|
5693
|
1767.51
|
10.24.17
|
|
What is the difference between "WNM-Notification and WNM notification? If there is no difference in function, then replace the name "WNM-Notification"
with "WNM notification".
|
Replace: "WNM-Notification" with "WNM notification" throughout the text, except when it is part of the name of a frame, field, etc. and
it uses initial caps: "WNM Notification".
|
|
EDITOR
|
|
5773
|
2212.14
|
17.3.1
|
|
"PHY_CCA", "PHY_RXEND", "PHY_DATA" and "PHY_RXSTART": there are no such primitives.
|
Throughout the draft, including all of the related figures, replace "PHY_CCA" with "PHY-CCA", replace "PHY_RXEND" with "PHY-RXEND", replace
"PHY_DATA" with "PHY-DATA", and replace "PHY_RXSTART" with "PHY-RXSTART". It might be possible to search and replace "PHY_" with "PHY-" univarsally (but that still requires manual labor with the figures).
|
|
EDITOR
|
|
6198
|
|
|
|
It is not always stated explicitly in various locations that conditional things are not present if the condition is not met, i.e. some
"and is not present otherwise" is missing
|
Add the cited text where missing
|
|
EDITOR
|
|
6237
|
|
|
|
The SAP primitive parameter names are inconsistent as to whether they have spaces or not
|
Be consistent (I suggest not having spaces, for contrast with frame contents)
|
|
EDITOR
|
|
6248
|
|
|
|
4.5.4.9 "Action frames specified with "No" in the "Robust" column of Table 8-46 (Category values) are not robust Management frames and
are not protected."; 11.1.7 "Action frames specified with "No" in the "Robust" column of Table 8-46 (Category values) are not robust Management frames and shall not be protected."; 11.5.19 "Action frames with "No" in the "Robust" column in Table 8-46 (Category
values) shall not be protected." -- duplication is at best wasteful
|
Delete all but one of these instances (I suggest not keeping the one in Clause 4)
|
|
EDITOR
|
|
6313
|
|
|
|
The editorial improvements made to FTM should where appropriate be made to TM
|
As it says in the comment
|
|
EDITOR
|
|
6366
|
1884.56
|
11.3.5.4
|
|
"KCK || KEK" is not the way it's done anywhere else, and the inconsistency leads to unnecessary doubt
|
Change all other instances of extraction of subfields from a KDF to use the || formulation (I can provide a list of such instances)
|
|
EDITOR
|
|
6390
|
|
|
|
As regards the listen interval (CID 3363), there are three formulations, which generally seem to follow the following rules:
- ListenInterval: the parameter in the MLME-(RE)ASSOCIATE.request, which the non-AP STA sets
- Listen Interval: the field in the (Re)Association Request, which the AP gets
- listen interval: the general notion (mostly used by security handshake timeout descriptions)
However, the wording is not always consistent.
|
I will propose text (not possible to give here)
|
|
EDITOR
|
|
6537
|
|
|
|
Use minuses not hyphens for subtraction and negative numbers
|
As it says in the comment
|
The comment fails to identify changes in sufficient detail so that the specific wording of the changes that will satisfy the commenter
can be determined.
|
EDITOR
|
|
6539
|
|
|
|
There are still a bunch of desires (nearly 100), under the "desir" stem (desirable, desiring)
|
Change them in the same way as the CID 2051 resolution
|
The comment fails to identify changes in sufficient detail so that the specific wording of the changes that will satisfy the commenter
can be determined.
|
EDITOR
|
|
6546
|
|
|
|
"the value $n", where "$n" is a number, can be compressed
|
Change all instances to "$n"
|
The comment fails to identify a specific issue to be addressed. It fails to identify changes in sufficient detail so that the specific
wording of the changes that will satisfy the commenter can be determined.
Furthermore the cited usage is not incorrect.
|
EDITOR
|
|
6551
|
|
|
|
The subclause headings for xXVECTOR parameters are sometimes missing the "xXVECTOR" or "field" or have a spurious "PHY", e.g. in 16.2.3.5,
18.2.2.6, 18.2.3.4, 18.2.3.5, 18.3.4.3, 16.3.3.3, 16.3.4, 17.2.3.3, 17.2.3.7, 17.2.3.14, 17.2.4 ,18.3.5.5
|
Add the missing "xXVECTOR"s and "field"s, delete the spurious "PHY"s
|
REJECTED (EDITOR: 2015-04-30 13:56:23Z) - The cited locations are unambiuous.
|
EDITOR
|
|
6573
|
2647.00
|
B.4
|
|
The PICS abbreviations are not helpful
|
Come up with some more useful abbreviations for the fundamental stuff, e.g. use "CF-IBSS" instead of "CF2.2" and "CF-HT" instead of "CF16"
|
|
EDITOR
|
|
6581
|
|
|
|
There should be a space before units
|
Make sure there is a (non-break) space between a number and its unit, except in identifiers, variables, etc. (I can provide a list of locations)
|
REJECTED (EDITOR: 2015-04-30 13:08:22Z) - The comment fails to identify a specific issue to be addressed. It fails to identify changes
in sufficient detail so that the specific wording of the changes that will satisfy the commenter can be determined.
|
EDITOR
|
|
6615
|
|
|
|
When should there be an "IEEE" in front of "802.11", "802.1X" etc.?
|
Define the rule, and apply it consistently
|
REVISED (EDITOR: 2015-05-28 13:54:22Z) - Editor to review all occurances of "802", and enforce the following rules:
1. A reference to a standard has the prefix "IEEE Std"
2. Other occurrences have the prefix "IEEE"
Check that the first occurrence of IEEE 802.11 and IEEE Std 802.11 have a ™ in both the front-matter and the body.
Note to editor, this is the same resolution as CID 6615.
|
EDITOR
|
|
6634
|
|
|
|
It says "of type data" (5 instances)
|
Change all instances to "of type Data"
|
Replace all "of type Data" (case insensitive) with "with the Type field equal to data".
At 1247.38 replace "Data frames sent under the DCF shall use the frame type Data and subtype Data or Null Function." with "A Data frame sent under the DCF shall have the Type field set to Data and the Subtype field set to Data or Null Function."
|
EDITOR
|
|
6635
|
|
|
|
It says "of type management" (5 instances)
|
Change all instances to "of type Management"
|
|
EDITOR
|
|
6684
|
|
|
|
Suspect uses of "will not", e.g. "The value of Nr within an explicit Beamforming feedback frame transmitted by a VHT beamformee will not
exceed the value indicated in the Beamformee STS Capability subfield of the VHT Capabilities element." and "The AP will not deliver the requested streams at the delivery interval as specified by the non-AP STA in the FMS Request element." Either make into
a NOTE or reformulate with "shall" or otherwise (e.g. latter is "does not" nearby).
|
As it says in the comment
|
The comment fails to identify changes in sufficient detail so that the specific wording of the changes that will satisfy the commenter
can be determined.
|
EDITOR
|
|
6693
|
560.00
|
8
|
|
"The X element/subelement/field/subfield is present in the Y frame/element/subelement/field/subfield" should be deleted. If it is not duplicated
in the description of Y, then it should be added to Y.
|
As it says in the comment
|
|
EDITOR
|
|
6694
|
560.00
|
8
|
|
Be consistent on whether to say "element" for rows in tables showing Action field formats
|
As it says in the comment
|
|
EDITOR
|
|
6707
|
|
|
|
Stop constantly repeating the stuff about "Extendable" "Yes" and "Subelements"!
|
As it says in the comment
|
|
EDITOR
|
|
6713
|
|
|
|
There are instances of "Probe Response" without a following "frame"
|
Append "frame" or make all-lowercase, throughout
|
|
EDITOR
|
|
6714
|
|
|
|
For things like Table 8-46 in D3.0, is the duplication of the NOTE on page 633 and 634 intentional? If not, is there a way to persuade
Frame not to do it?
|
As it says in the comment
|
|
EDITOR
|
|
6715
|
|
|
|
The capitalisation of "operating class" is haphazard
|
Make it all-lowercase, except in field names etc.
|
|
EDITOR
|
|
6723
|
|
|
|
Terms like "HT format PPDU" (including NON_HT, non-HT etc.) don't need the "format"
|
Delete the spurious "format"s throughout
|
|
EDITOR
|
|
6725
|
|
|
|
"loop" in MSCs needs angle brackets after.
|
Add angle brackets wherever missing
|
|
EDITOR
|
|
6728
|
|
|
|
"the Sleep Mode element" needs "WNM-" added (and s lowercased). Sometimes "elements", which is suspect. Also follow-ons, e.g. references
to "Sleep Mode Request" frames.
|
As it says in the comment
|
|
EDITOR
|
|
6730
|
|
|
|
"VHT Capabilities element (optional). The VHT Capabilities element is present if the dot11VHTOptionImplemented is true" (multiple instances).
Probably other spurious "Blah element (optionals)" and also many spurious "the dot11"s (possibly acceptable for *Entry and maybe also *Table?). Also case of "the status code is SUCCESS" (should be Status Code).
|
Delete "VHT Capabilities element (optional)" in the cited text, and similarly in other places. Delete "the" before "dot11" and similarly
in other places.
|
|
EDITOR
|
|
6731
|
|
|
|
It says "the status code is SUCCESS"
|
Change "status code" to "Status Code" throughout
|
|
EDITOR
|
|
6732
|
|
|
|
"The [HT] NDP Announcement subfield in the [HT variant] HT Control field is set to 1 to indicate NDP sounding." needs addition of the bracketed
terms. Also "and the [HT] NDP Announcement subfield equal to 0" on p1291. Also "or the [HT] NDP Announcement subfield of the [HT variant] HT Control field" on p1416 (also missing [HT variant] later in para). Page references might be to D3.0
|
As it says in the comment
|
|
EDITOR
|
|
6733
|
|
|
|
Ref. to "8.4.2.21.10" in new BSSID stuff -- caption does not say "LCI report" nor "Location configuration information" nor "field" etc.
|
I will propose text once I've worked out what I was going on about
|
|
EDITOR
|
|
6741
|
|
|
|
Fix the case of "TIM Broadcast" (as for WNM-Sleep Mode under CID 3369).
|
As it says in the comment
|
|
EDITOR
|
|
6742
|
560.00
|
8
|
|
Behavioural stuff should not be in clause 8, it should be in a later clause.
|
As it says in the comment
|
|
EDITOR
|
|
6744
|
|
|
|
"Authentication-Response" etc. doesn't always have the hyphen.
|
Add missing hyphens
|
|
EDITOR
|
|
6750
|
|
|
|
Hyphen missing in "modulation-dependent"
|
As it says in the comment
|
|
EDITOR
|
|
6754
|
|
|
|
Table 9-17 should be moved to clause 8, somewhere near Table 8-34 [these might be D3.0 references]
|
As it says in the comment
|
|
EDITOR
|
|
6764
|
|
|
|
It's almost always "RSNE" not "RSN element" ... but not quite.
|
Change "RSN element" to "RSNE" throughout (except definition)
|
|
EDITOR
|
|
6766
|
|
|
|
"A non-AP STA shall be in Active mode upon Association or Reassociation." appears before active mode has been introduced.
|
Add a forward reference
|
|
EDITOR
|
|
6771
|
|
|
|
A few "retry bit"s
|
Change all of them to "Retry bit"s
|
|
EDITOR
|
|
6773
|
|
|
|
"properly" (formatted, received, etc.) -- the spec should be written with the implicit understanding that things are done properly!
|
Delete "properly" throughout
|
|
EDITOR
|
|
6788
|
|
|
|
"bufferable" v. "buffered" -- there is confusion in these terms. Probably move to "buffered" for most cases
|
As it says in the comment
|
|
EDITOR
|
|
6793
|
|
|
|
"FST" is an action, so what's an "FST session"?
|
Clarify
|
|
EDITOR
|
|
6796
|
|
|
|
The D_i,n and O_m definitions apply to the equation before the equation after which they are defined -- move them up.
|
As it says in the comment
|
|
EDITOR
|
|
6810
|
|
|
|
Identifiers don't really "name a" $something, they, well, identify them.
|
Change "name" to "identify"
|
|
EDITOR
|
|
6812
|
|
|
|
"OFDM"/"SC" "packets" should be "modulations".
|
As it says in the comment
|
|
EDITOR
|