All,
In any case, the P802.3bp editorial team will make sure that rogue comments are properly classified.
Regards,
Steve
Steven B. Carlson
Chair, IEEE P802.3bp 1000BASE-T1 PHY Task Force
http://www.ieee802.org/3/bp/index.html
Chair, IEEE P802.3bw 100BASE-T1 PHY Task Force
http://www.ieee802.org/3/bw/index.html
Executive Secretary, IEEE 802.3 Ethernet Working Group
http://www.ieee802.org/3/index.html
President
High Speed Design, Inc.
Portland, OR
scarlson@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
From: Geoff Thompson [mailto:thompson@xxxxxxxx]
Sent: Wednesday, January 06, 2016 7:58 AM
To: STDS-802-3-RTPGE@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [802.3_RTPGE] P802.3bp - Chair's Standard Offer -Reminder
George-
I think the answer to your question:
Why they didn't put that into the spreadsheet in the IEEE-SA,
I don't know. Maybe some groups allow mandatory rogue comments....
...is that at the SA the emphasis is that all comments must be considered by the comment resolution body/process.
My guess is that they didn't want to water down that process.
Even more likely is that they just didn't think about it that deeply.
The SA staff is considerably less sophisticated about their understanding of comment handling and process than we (all of 802) are.
Steve - thanks for putting the rogue comments spreadsheet on the web page. One thing not mentioned there - as I understand it, for all 'rogue comments' the 'must be satisfied' field must be "No"
Why they didn't put that into the spreadsheet in the IEEE-SA, I don't know. Maybe some groups allow mandatory rogue comments....
George A. Zimmerman, Ph.D.
President and Principle Consultant
Experts in PHYsical Communications