[STDS-802-16] P802.16-REVd/D5: final editing
I'd like to explain Itzik's note in more detail.
If the IEEE-SA Standards Board (upon RevCom recommendation) approves
P802.16-REVd/D5 (on June 24), then the IEEE editorial staff will
prepare a version for publication. The staff will make certain
editorial changes as appropriate, correcting spelling and grammar,
etc.
The Working Group can propose a set of editorial corrections for the
review of the staff editor. However, the editor will only consider
"pure" editorial changes that, in her view, do not change the meaning
of the draft that was approved by the Sponsor Gallot Group. If we
think a questionable change is editorial, we need to explain why.
Technical changes will need to me incorporated into a balloted
standard.
I've asked Itzik to propose a set of editorial corrections and seek
comment on them. He has circulated a table. In addition, he has
prepared a marked-up draft showing the edits:
http://ieee802.org/16/private/drafts/tgd/P80216-REVd_D5Edit1.zip
I'd like to get the changes to IEEE by June 25.
Roger
At 15:01 +0200 04/06/15, Itzik Kitroser wrote:
>Hello all,
>
>I was waiting for Roger to acknowledge, but I don't want to delay the
>process.
>
>I have uploaded into the TGd upload directory a word document describing
>the editorial changes I have made to D5.
>
><http://wirelessman.dyndns.org/cgi-script/CSUpload//upload/TGd%252edb/Ed
>itorial%20Comments.doc>
>
>
>Roger will post a link to a markup draft reflecting those changes.
>I would like to ask if anybody object to the proposed changes, and in
>addition if anyone has anything to add.
>Please notice that only "pure" editorial changes are acceptable, any
>other proposed changes, if you think are appropriate, must be
>accompanied with "strong" motivation/explanation (any technical changes
>will be dealt with in the errata stage).
>
>Thanks,
>Itzik.
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-stds-802-16@listserv.ieee.org
>[mailto:owner-stds-802-16@listserv.ieee.org] On Behalf Of Roger B. Marks
>Sent: Sunday, June 06, 2004 11:06 PM
>To: STDS-802-16@listserv.ieee.org
>Subject: [STDS-802-16] report of IEEE P802.16-REVd under Procedure 10
>
>Dear LMSC EC Colleagues:
>
>In our meeting of 19 March, the SEC granted conditional approval,
>according to Procedure 10, to forward IEEE P802.16-REVd ["Draft IEEE
>Standard for Local and metropolitan area networks - Part 16: Air
>Interface for Fixed Broadband Wireless Access Systems"] to RevCom.
>Accordingly, I am making this report.
>
>Following EC approval, we proceeded to recirculate from April 1-15.
>Comments were received and resolved, in an Internet-based resolution
>process with a Ballot Resolution Committee (BRC) comprising all the
>members of the 802.16 Working Group. The BRC accepted some comments,
>leading to the need for a new draft (D5).
>
>I submitted P802.16-REVd/D5 to RevCom in time to meet their 14 May
>deadline for consideration on 23 June. Following RevCom rules, a
>second recirc (confirmation ballot) opened by the same 14 May
>deadline.
>
>The confirmation ballot ran from 14-29 May. The Procedure 10
>conditions have been met. The confirmation ballot closed with no new
>Disapprove votes; the final result was 59 Approve, 1 Disapprove, 2
>Abstain (98.3% Approval). One Disapprove comment was received, but it
>was a reiteration of a rejected comment from the same voter. That
>pair of comments are the only unresolved Disapprove comments
>remaining. It is quite clear that the comment was a repeat, since it
>said "There seems hence little need to provide further argumentation
>beyond pointing to the original comment and Reason for
>Recommendation", and the Suggested Remedy was simply "Reconsider
>comment 004." The BRC did consider this comment again and rejected it
>in an Internet vote in which it received an approval ratio of 5%.
>
>No changes of any kind have been made to the draft as a result of the
>confirmation ballot. The complete RevCom submittal package for
>P802.16-REVd/D5, updated with the final confirmation ballot results
>and including the pair of unresolved Disapprove comments, is here:
> http://ieee802.org/16/private/ballots/misc/80216-04_26r1.pdf
>
>Regards,
>
>Roger
>--
>
>Dr. Roger B. Marks <mailto:marks@nist.gov> +1 303 497 3037
>National Institute of Standards and Technology/Boulder, CO, USA
>Chair, IEEE 802.16 Working Group on Broadband Wireless Access
> <http://WirelessMAN.org>