Re: [STDS-802-16] Editorial Motion
Dear SY,
After I prepare and share the Editorial motion, any member may ask to have a comment in the list addressed as a Technical comment. Comment B1022 was changed to Technical because someone requested it.
Looking at the resolution, it seems this comment was withdrawn, which is a bit confusing. If it was an Editorial fix for D3, I don't understand why the commenter withdrew the comment.
Regards,
Ron
Looking at
On 2010-01-14, at 1:39 PM, S.Y. Cheng wrote:
> Dear Ron
>
> We have proposed in Comment #B1022 that contribution C80216m-09_2648r2 has been accepted-modified in the November meeting (Session #64) but not implemented correctly in P802.16m/D3. We did not know why Comment #B1022 is changed to Technical. Please let us know how to correct this typo in D3. Thanks.
>
> Kindest regards
> SY.
>
> VoIP Lab
> Institute of Computer Science and Information Engineering
> National Ilan University
> Email: aabssb@hotmail.com
>
> --------------------------------------------------
> From: "Ron Murias" <ron@MURIAS.CA>
> Sent: Tuesday, January 12, 2010 4:01 AM
> To: <STDS-802-16@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG>
> Subject: [STDS-802-16] Editorial Motion
>
>> All,
>>
>> I have uploaded (to the Temp directory) a list of comments that I intend to include in my Editorial Motion at the end of the week. Please review this list and let me know if any of these comments should be treated as Technical comments.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Ron Murias
>> Editor