RE: [RPRWG] Could we discard old (often obsolete) comments?
Bob,
Good point. Maybe this would be best handled by deleting _my_
old comments from D0.1, as I can confirm they are largely
redundant.
I agree that others should not be discarded for this round
of review, but that we should decide next week on how to
handle the general case of old-resolved future comments.
DVJ
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Robert D. Love [mailto:rdlove@xxxxxxxxx]
>>Sent: Thursday, May 02, 2002 7:12 AM
>>To: David V. James; Tom_Alexander@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>Cc: stds-802-17@xxxxxxxx
>>Subject: Re: [RPRWG] Could we discard old (often obsolete) comments?
>>
>>
>>David, many of us submitted comments under the assumption that our old
>>unaddressed comments would still stand. It is now too late to
>>discard them
>>for draft 0.2. However, at next week's meeting we can decide how
>>to proceed
>>for the next draft.
>>
>>Best regards,
>>
>>Robert D. Love
>>President, Resilient Packet Ring Alliance
>>President, LAN Connect Consultants
>>7105 Leveret Circle Raleigh, NC 27615
>>Phone: 919 848-6773 Mobile: 919 810-7816
>>email: rdlove@xxxxxxxx Fax: 208 978-1187
>>----- Original Message -----
>>From: "David V. James" <dvj@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>To: <Tom_Alexander@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>Cc: <stds-802-17@xxxxxxxx>
>>Sent: Wednesday, May 01, 2002 11:11 PM
>>Subject: [RPRWG] Could we discard old (often obsolete) comments?
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Tom,
>>>
>>> I would like to suggest that we discard unaddressed comments
>>> (which were skipped due to lack of time) from draft 0.1 when
>>> we move on to D0.2. Instead, can we let the owner of these
>>> comments resubmit them with revised page, line, section, and
>>> (if necessary) technical content?
>>>
>>> On my last comments, I originally planned to just resubmit
>>> them with revised page/line/section numbers. However, by the
>>> time I reviewed them, the technical comments often changed.
>>> Even when the technical content remained stable, it was easy
>>> enough to cut-and-past the old comment into the new.
>>>
>>> This would seem to save you some time, not having to deal
>>> with old (and possibly no longer relevant) comments. Saving
>>> the groups time would also be valuable. I'm the one that has
>>> the most comments on record (and therefore most likely to
>>> complain), and its my preference. So, hopefully no one else
>>> would complain.
>>>
>>> If this isn't possible, in general, can I request it be applied
>>> to my comments in specific (it technically possible, of course).
>>> I think discarding my D0.1 comments would allow for a more
>>> effecient addressing of D0.2 comments. Any minor missed topics
>>> will be a small percentage and (if any) can be addressed through
>>> the next round of comments.
>>>
>>> Thanks!
>>> DVJ
>>>
>>> BTW, John Lemon supplied the Frame sources for D0.2, so I don't
>>> need them any more. However, it could help contributors (in general)
>>> prepare drop-in text if these were generally available.
>>>
>>>
>>> David V. James, PhD
>>> Chief Architect
>>> Network Processing Solutions
>>> Data Communications Division
>>> Cypress Semiconductor
>>> 110 Nortech Parkway
>>> San Jose, CA 95134
>>> Work: +1.408.942.2010
>>> Cell: +1.650.954.6906
>>> Fax: +1.408.942.2099
>>> Work: djz@xxxxxxxxxxx
>>> Base: dvj@xxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>
>>