| Thread Links | Date Links | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thread Prev | Thread Next | Thread Index | Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index |
I think the title you suggest is an improvement.Regards,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 Tue, Mar 8, 2022 at 6:08 PM Joseph Levy <Joseph.Levy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:Hi Emily and All,
I’ve been thinking about the CID discussed today trying to fix the title of Figure 10.1. I agree with the commentor that the phrasing is awkward and should probably be fixed. However, I don’t agree with the commentor’s proposed change, as it changes the meaning.
Hence, how about changing: “Figure 10-1—Non-DMG non-CMMG non-S1G STA MAC architecture” to “Figure 10-1—STA MAC architecture (Non-DMG non-CMMG non-S1G)”
Also the text following the figure should be modified for consistency. From “In a non-DMG non-CMMG non-S1G STA:” to: “In a STA that is neither a DMG STA, nor a CMMG STA, nor an S1G STA:”
I believe this construction makes some sense as the rest of section 10.2.1 define the architecture for these additional cases (DMG, SMMG, and S1G). Also, if it makes sense to change the text as above, it may be preferred to use a similar construction for the figure title:
e.g., Figure 10-1—STA MAC architecture (for a STA that is neither a DMG STA, nor a CMMG STA, nor an S1G STA).
Is this helpful, or do you think rejection is preferred? I’ll accept either approach.
Regards,
Joseph
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