RE: [802SEC] +++ SEC Ballot: Forward IEEE 802.15.1 to Sponsor Ballot
I'm confused. I looked over the unresolved negative comments workbook and
see a number of editorial comments and two voters with the same technical
comment. The technical comments are listed as "closed". Does this mean
that the voters have agreed to the indicated resolution?
I question why there are so many editorial issues still open. If they are
editorial, they won't change the meaning of the document. In particular,
the use of "must" in so many places does not seem to meet the IEEE style
guide. Why were the editorial issues not addressed and closed?
-Bob
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-stds-802-sec@ieee.org [mailto:owner-stds-802-sec@ieee.org]On
Behalf Of Jim Carlo
Sent: Tuesday, May 08, 2001 10:25 AM
To: IEEE802
Subject: [802SEC] +++ SEC Ballot: Forward IEEE 802.15.1 to Sponsor
Ballot
RESEND TO CLARIFY WHAT ACTION WE ARE TAKING. SORRY FOR DUPLICATION. I HAVE
ALSO ADDED POINTERS TO DRAFTS, REMAINING COMMENTS, BALLOT RESOLUTION PER VIC
HAYES REQUEST.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
SEC OFFICIAL EMAIL BALLOT 802.0/8May2001
Issue Date: 8May2001 Closing Date: 19May2001
Moved By: Bob Heile Seconded By: Stuart Kerry
Move: Approve Forwarding to Sponsor Ballot: 802.15.1 (Draft Standard for
Part 15.1: Wireless Medium Access Control (MAC) and Physical Layer (PHY)
specifications for Wireless Personal Area Networks(TM))
Notes:
1) During the Recirculation Ballot, one additional No voter made eight
comments, these comments were resolved without Technical Changes to the
draft through discussions with the WG Ballot Resolution Group, and the No
voter has changed his vote to an approve. The original NO voter continued to
vote NO with additional NO comments. Because of the additional No vote
received (even though resolved), a new SEC motion is required for approval
to move to Sponsor Ballot.
2) During the IEEE 802 Plenary HH SEC Meeting on 15Mar01 the following
motion was approved:
"Move that the ExCom forward IEEE Draft 802.15.1/D1.0 to Sponsor ballot,
based on a successful completion of a WG re-circulation ballot. Conditional
approval to expire at the beginning of the Portland Plenary Meeting"
3) The final ballot count is:
74 Working Group Voting Members
56 Voting Approve
1 Voting Do Not Approve (Disapprove comments circulated during last
recirculation ballot)
1 Abstain
4) The Draft can be found here:
http://ieee802.org/15/private/Draft/
99000D10P802-15-1__Draft_Standard.pdf
Note: The username/password for the WG Web Site is: [deleted]
II. The unresolved negative comment Workbook can be found here:
http://ieee802.org/15/pub/LB10/01117r12P802-15_WG-LB8-Comment-Form.xls
III. The letters & reports on resolution can be found here:
http://ieee802.org/15/pub/LB10/Gilb-LB10-Decline-Letter.pdf
LB8-Reply-Comments_4May01.PDF
LB10-Comments_4May01.PDF
or all via:
http://ieee802.org/15/pub/LB10/LB10.html
Jim Carlo (j.carlo@ieee.org) Cellular:1-214-693-1776
Voice&Fax:1-214-853-5274
TI Fellow, Networking Standards at Texas Instruments
Vice Chair, IEEE-SA Standards Board
Chair, IEEE802 LAN/MAN Standards Committee