Hello Mike,
Can you add a brief item for today's agenda to see if there is consensus
on this direction, please? If there is I'll produce a submission with
the locations.
Thanks,
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: Stephen McCann <mccann.stephen@xxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, 10 March 2022 08:12
To: STDS-802-11-TGM@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [STDS-802-11-TGM] REVme CID 2297
--- This message came from the IEEE 802.11 Task Group M Technical Reflector ---
Mark,
that would be great and therefore I also support #2 as the preferred direction.
Kind regards
Stephen
On Wed, 9 Mar 2022 at 21:02, Mark Rison <m.rison@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
--- This message came from the IEEE 802.11 Task Group M Technical Reflector ---
> I am ok with Resolution #1, but only because the locations are not stated in Resolution #2.
I can easily generate the locations if #2 is the preferred direction.
Thanks,
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: Jon Rosdahl <jrosdahl@xxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, 9 March 2022 19:50
To: STDS-802-11-TGM@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [STDS-802-11-TGM] REVme CID 2297
--- This message came from the IEEE 802.11 Task Group M Technical Reflector ---
I am ok with Resolution #1, but only because the locations are not stated in Resolution #2.
I am opposed in general to global changes without the locations.
As for the use or not of hyphens, I have other things I think I would like to think about.
Jon
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jon Rosdahl Engineer, Senior Staff
IEEE 802 Executive Secretary Qualcomm Technologies, Inc.
office: 801-492-4023 10871 North 5750 West
cell: 801-376-6435 Highland, UT 84003
A Job is only necessary to eat!
A Family is necessary to be happy!!
On Wed, Mar 9, 2022 at 12:29 PM Sean Coffey <coffey@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
--- This message came from the IEEE 802.11 Task Group M Technical Reflector ---
Mike, all,
I would prefer a resolution along the lines of Proposed Resolution #2.
In all of these cases (I think), the draft is not talking about a generic “high-throughput” thing, but is instead talking about things introduced in 11n. The draft could have been written to make High Throughput a defined term or proper noun or whatever, and in that case, the usual grammatical rules on compound adjectives would not apply, and the term shouldn’t be hyphenated. As it is, it seems the defined term / proper noun is “HT”, and so we don’t capitalize “high throughout” when it’s spelled out. Still, it seems more natural to me to think of “high throughput” (when referring to HT) as a single block that isn’t hyphenated.
Regards,
Sean
From: M Montemurro <montemurro.michael@xxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, March 9, 2022 10:07 AM
To: STDS-802-11-TGM@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [STDS-802-11-TGM] REVme CID 2297
--- This message came from the IEEE 802.11 Task Group M Technical Reflector ---
Somehow the reflector was removed from this email thread.
Could other members who participate in TGm give their opinion on what approach we should take on resolving this comment?
Note that the commenter prefers Proposed Resolution #1.
Seeking feedback on the reflector will give us a direction to take when we consider this comment during a TGm session.
Cheers,
Mike
On Wed, Mar 9, 2022 at 6:24 AM Stephen McCann <mccann.stephen@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Mark,
thanks for spending your time working on this CID. I prefer resolution #1, as it's a simpler solution for the editors.
Kind regards
Stephen
On Wed, 9 Mar 2022 at 09:54, Mark Rison <m.rison@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hello,
I have prepared the following resolutions. I've added #2 because I think
I heard Joe suggesting it at the very end of the teleconf (I can provide
locations if necessary).
Identifiers
Comment
Proposed change
CID 2297
Stephen McCANN
3.2
214.49
The term "high throughput (HT)" does not use a hyphen.
Change "high throughput (HT)" to "high-throughput (HT)".
Discussion:
It is not clear whether “high-throughput” should have a hyphen. Grammatically, as an adjective, it should, but IEEE 802.11 hates hyphens, and “high-throughput” is not on the list of exceptional permissions to use hyphens. Note also that “very high throughput” doesn’t have hyphens either.
Proposed resolution #1:
REVISED
Change “high throughput” to “high-throughput” at 2.18, 214.49, 229.40.
Change “High Throughput SIGNAL field” to “high-throughput SIGNAL field” at 239.59.
Change “High Throughput” to “High-Throughput” at 1338.37 (leftmost instance), 1339.55, 1339.59, 5389.46.
Proposed resolution #2:
REVISED
Change “high-throughput” to “high throughput”, except in “non-high-throughput”, case-insensitively (~40 instances, mostly in Clause 3).
Thanks,
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: Stephen McCann <mccann.stephen@xxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, 9 March 2022 08:23
To: M Montemurro <montemurro.michael@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Qi, Emily H <emily.h.qi@xxxxxxxxx>; Mark Rison <m.rison@xxxxxxxxxxx>; stds-802-11-tgm <STDS-802-11-TGM@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: REVme CID 2297
Mike,
My original intention was to only suggest the change at the cited reference. I did not intend to check for every other occurrence in the draft. Thanks.
Kind regards
Stephen
On Tue, 8 Mar 2022 at 23:57, M Montemurro <montemurro.michael@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hi Stephen,
Emily proposed a resolution today for this comment:
21/0689r0
2297
214.00
3.2
The term "high throughput (HT)" does not use a hyphen.
Change "high throughput (HT)" to "high-throughput (HT)".
There was a debate on what the scope of your comment was. Did you intend for the comment to fix only this location or did you want to go through the entire draft to fix other locations?
I'm asking because Mark Rison believes the scope needs to be expanded to fix every location where this issue exists. The comment was assigned to him on the call today.
Thanks,
Mike
To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-11-TGM list, click the following link: https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-11-TGM&A=1
------Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail.
To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-11-TGM list, click the following link: https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-11-TGM&A=1
To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-11-TGM list, click the following link: https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-11-TGM&A=1
To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-11-TGM list, click the following link: https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-11-TGM&A=1
To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-11-TGM list, click the following link: https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-11-TGM&A=1