| Thread Links | Date Links | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thread Prev | Thread Next | Thread Index | Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index |
|
+ James Gilb Steve, Probably the best thing to do is to look at the official EC document, which will be what is voted on next week by the EC. Here is the link to the document,
https://mentor.ieee.org/802-ec/dcn/20/ec-20-0220-02-00EC-october-2020-rules-meeting.odp I copied James Gilb, on this email, so he can address any questions. I cannot confirm if the redline I tried to regenerate is 100% accurate, I just did my best. The official document is what will be voted on so best to focus on that. Regards, Steve -----Original Message----- Hi Steve: No I was not intentionally trying to suggest any change at this point. I was merely trying to confirm what the actual changes were. In your rendition, it was hard to tell since there was a wholesale block change. If indeed the only editorial changes to the document where what was contained on slide 3, then my version should also be what James intended (on slide 3). What became bullets 1 and 3 were essentially unchanged technically... which was a different impression to what i heard you describe on the call. Bullet 2 is completely new but seems to be addressing standards that are currently drafts/projects in flight. While the intention of #2 might have been noble, some active projects may be in early stages or in flux. So the likelihood of getting the list "right" seems pretty low/noisy. If the intended "hope" is addressed
with the "should" then the expectation might be met. So i guess the only thing to confirm now is if both your and my versions actually yield the same words that James intended. regards, kiwin On 11/4/2020 3:13 PM, Steve Shellhammer wrote: > Steve, > > I will forward this on the EC email reflector, addressed to James. It looks like you have some suggested edits in the document. > > The last sentence was intentionally deleted since it did not seem necessary. > > I reminded James of the title of the Section but that did not make it into his slides. > > Regards, > Steve > > -----Original Message----- > From: Stephen [kiwin] PALM <ieee@xxxxxxxxx> > Sent: Monday, November 2, 2020 9:29 PM > To: Steve Shellhammer <sshellha@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>;
>
STDS-802-19@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Subject: Re: [802.19] EC Document on Chairs Guidelines - Scope of CA
> Document > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > --- > CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > --- > > Thanks - that was helpful - but there are a few more questions -embedded. > > I also tried to do a word for word comparison - is it correct? > > On 10/30/2020 11:50 AM, Steve Shellhammer wrote: >> All, >> >> Yesterday, the IEEE 802 Rules committee considered
>> the recommended text on the Chairs Guidelines on “The Scope of the
>> Coexistence Assessment Document.” The text was edited based on discussions at the Rules committee. >> >> The 802 Rules chair posted a document, that
>> includes the edited text on Slide 3 of the attached document. >> >> The 802 Executive Committee will consider and vote
>> on these rules changes at the EC closing on November 13. >> >> I wanted to make sure that the 802.19 members and
>> participants could see this document before it is considered at the EC Closing meeting. >> >> Regards, >> >> Steve >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> - >> ------------------------------ >> >> To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-19 list, click the following link: >>
https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-19&A=1 >> > > ______________________________________________________________________ > __ To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-19 list, click the following link:
>
https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-19&A=1 > To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-19 list, click the following link: https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-19&A=1 |