[RPRWG] Comment #546
Colleagues,
It appears that there was an oversight in the May interim: comment #546
against Clause 9, which was marked as "Deferred to WG", was never brought up
before the WG and resolved. In addition, I failed to catch this one when
reviewing the comment database prior to posting it last week. I apologize
for the oversight and any problems this may have created.
Comment #546 refers to the definition of "localWeight". It seems that the
CRG was split between two resolutions and hence it was hence deferred to the
WG. Upon closer investigation, it further appears that comments #573 and
#580 also refer to the same or a related issue, and were successfully
resolved. However, as comment #546 was not brought before the WG, the issue
remains in some doubt.
Therefore, I have instructed the editors of Clause 9 to implement the
changes as directed by all of the other comments against the clause
(including #580 and #573), and further to add an editor's note indicating
that comment #546 was overlooked during the meeting, will be resubmitted
against D2.3, and could potentially change some of the existing text. I will
personally resubmit comment #546 against D2.3 for resolution at the next
meeting.
Best regards,
- Tom Alexander
Chief Editor, P802.17