Re: [RPRWG] Bug reporting on 802.17, how is it to be done?
>> Firstly, since the standard has not been published, it is not
>> possible to request changes to or clarifications of something
>> that does not exist.
> 1) From my understanding, individuals can purchase copies, so some
> form of informal standard (probably the copy Tom sent to IEEE)
> exists. Am I confused?
It was possible to purchase the draft up until the point where the standard was approved. At that point, the IEEE removes the draft from their catalog of purchasable documents.
> 2) Its always possible to comment on what is known to be coming,
> to comment in the intended format for later contributions, and
> to hold those comments until the review opens.
Unless you are more prescient than I thought, you can not know what is to be coming. At a minimum, page numbers have changed a great deal. Many, many typos have been corrected. Et cetera.
> 3) I'm sure there are many implementers, who are finding bugs
> on first implementations, so providing and early/convenient
> submittal process could pick these up also.
I agree that starting the process soon is desirable. That's why I hope to have the process approved at the next plenary.
> I will be doing that (writing them down in the last CRD format)
> because I forget things unless I write them down when first observed.
> So, a hint as to the eventual process (or at least the format
> for submittals) would be most helpful and lead to more complete
> contributions.
The same information as was requested in the CRDs will be needed, so the CRD is certainly a good starting point for storing ideas until we get the process started.
>> Secondly, at the November plenary, I intend to put forward a
>> motion to adopt a specified process for handling maintenance
>> requests, and a motion to adopt a specified process for handling
>> interpretation requests. So, such requests should be possible to
>> submit sometime after the November plenary. Please watch the web
>> site for details after the November plenary.
> If you schedule the motion at the beginning of the meeting,
> and the submittal format is known, I can have comments available
> (2 weeks before) so that you can get an early start on resolutions.
> Of course, if that seems premature, I can also wait. Thanks for
> the info.
The interpretation request process will be built upon the foundation documented in http://standards.ieee.org/reading/ieee/interp/. Note that these are not sent directly to any member or officer of the WG.
jl