| 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 ---
I see this is scheduled to be discussed on today's teleconf, so… Please be aware of the guidance in the IEEE Style Guide: 15.3 Presentation of equations Certain types of material in displayed equations are automatically italic. Some simple general rules apply.
All variables are italic. (e.g., x, y, n). Function names and abbreviations are
Roman (sin, cos, sinc, sinh), as
are units or unit abbreviations (e.g., deg, Hz,)
complete words (e.g., in, out), and abbreviations of words (e.g., max, min), or acronyms (e.g., SNR). Single letter superscripts and subscripts may be italic even if
they are abbreviations, unless this leads to inconsistency between italic and roman characters for similar
types of subscripts. The problem is that these so-called simple general rules are not simple, because they intersect. The specific issue is things which are both a "word" (so should be roman) and a "variable" (so should be italic). So if you have Time = Distance / Speed then are the sets of letters "words" or "variables"? I (currently) take no particular position, but I do think it would be desirable to strive for consistency. BTW, I note some other rules which may be pertinent to comments made on D4.0, e.g.: A multiplication sign (×), not the letter “x” or a multidot (∙), should be used to indicate multiplication. References: https://www.ieee.org/documents/style_manual.pdf https://development.standards.ieee.org/myproject/Public/mytools/draft/styleman.pdf (I am not sure how these two relate; they seem in places to be mutually inconsistent.) Mark --
Mark RISON, Standards Architect, WLAN English/Esperanto/Français Samsung Cambridge Solution Centre Tel: +44 1223 434600 Innovation Park, Cambridge CB4 0DS Fax: +44 1223 434601 ROYAUME UNI WWW: http://www.samsung.com/uk From: ***** IEEE stds-802-11-tgm
List ***** [mailto:STDS-802-11-TGM@xxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Stephens, Adrian P --- This message came from the IEEE 802.11 Task Group M Technical Reflector ---
Hello Edward and Emily, Please be aware of the guidance in the IEEE Style Guide: 15.3 Presentation of equations Certain types of material in displayed equations are automatically italic. Some simple general rules apply.
All variables are italic. (e.g., x, y, n). Function names and abbreviations are
Roman (sin, cos, sinc, sinh), as
are units or unit abbreviations (e.g., deg, Hz,)
complete words (e.g., in, out), and abbreviations of words (e.g., max, min), or acronyms (e.g., SNR). Single letter superscripts and subscripts may be italic even if
they are abbreviations, unless this leads to inconsistency between italic and roman characters for similar
types of subscripts. We have numerous comments this time round (mainly from Guido) asking for changes. For example comment 6853: “Compare the formating of "Duration = (i - 1) x (TXTIME(CF-End) + SIFS)" with G(x) in 8.2.4.8. In G(x) all variables are written in italics. In the present formula only i is written in italics. However, Duration
is variable too and thus should be written in italics too.” The cited G(x) is at 590.53. Compared to the style guide, 590.53 is almost correct, except the “G” should be Roman, as it represents a function. The cited problematical equation is “Duration = (i– 1) × (TXTIME(CF-End) + SIFS)”, all except the “i” is Roman. According to the rules TXTIME() is a function, and should be Roman. CF-End is not a variable, but a word, although what a word is doing as a parameter is anybody’s guess. Likewise SIFS. It would have meant more sense if it was aSIFSTime, because that is an attribute with a value. Even that should be Roman because it is a “word”. Finally “Duration” is a whole word, and so should be Roman. So, all of the proposed changes are, IMHO, needless work, and move us further away from the IEEE’s Style guide. I would urge caution when resolving such comments. If we do want to spend effort making equations clearer,
then we should look to replace “words and self-defining phrases” in equations with 1-character subscripted variables. For example: t = (time to drink a beer) * 2 + time to get another order in is probably better represented: (_ = subscript)
Purists will realize that my equation, while pedagogically useful is semantically and economically flawed. Best Regards, Adrian P STEPHENS Tel: +44 (1793) 404825 (office) ---------------------------------------------- _______________________________________________________________________________
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 _______________________________________________________________________________
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 _______________________________________________________________________________ |