|
Approve.
Carl
Dear
SEC,
This is a 14 day SEC email ballot to make a determination on the
below SEC motion to authorize forwarding 802.15.2 D9 to RevCom.
Moved by Bob
Heile, Seconded by Stuart Kerry
The email ballot opens on Thursday
April 17, 2003 6:30PM EDT and closes Thursday May 1, 2003 6:30PM
EDT.
Please direct your responses to the SEC reflector with a CC
directly to me (p.nikolich@ieee.org).
Regards,
--Paul
Nikolich
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bob Heile"
<bheile@ieee.org>
To: <p.nikolich@ieee.org>
Cc: <stuart@ok-brit.com>;
<Stuart.Kerry@philips.com>; <shell@symbol.com>;
<david.cypher@nist.gov>; "bob Heile" <bheile@ieee.org>
Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2003 7:08 AM
Subject: Move to
Forward 15.2 D9 to RevCom
> Paul
>
> I would like to
start a 10 day SEC email Letter Ballot.
>
> Having successfully
completed Sponsor Ballot, Move to Forward 802.15.2
> Draft 9 to
RevCom.
>
> Supporting documentation has been issued in previous
emails to the SEC.
>
> moved: Bob Heile
>
second: Stuart Kerry
>
>
> Bob Heile, Ph.D
>
Chair, IEEE 802.15 Working Group on Wireless Personal Area Networks
>
Chair, ZigBee Alliance
> 11 Louis Road
> Attleboro, MA
02703 USA
> Phone: 508-222-1393
> Mobile:
781-929-4832
> Fax: 508-222-0515
>
email: bheile@ieee.org
>
Supporting
Documentation:
----- Original Message -----
From: Bob Heile
To:
stds-802-sec@ieee.org
Cc: shell@symbol.com ; david.cypher@nist.gov
Sent: Wednesday, April 16, 2003 6:10 PM
Subject: [802SEC] Report on
15.2 Recirculation Ballot
The 15.2 Recirculation ballot closed on
April 15. The results were:
1. This ballot has met the 75% returned
ballot requirement.
66 eligible people in this ballot group.
48
affirmative votes
1 negative votes with comments
0 negative votes
without comments
7 abstention votes
=====
56 votes received = 84%
returned
12% abstention
2. The 75% affirmation requirement is being
met.
48 affirmative votes
1 negative votes with comments
=====
49
votes = 97% affirmative
We received one new affirmative and one of the
no voters changed their vote
to affirmative. The one remaining no
vote was from the previous ballot and
was ruled then as not a valid
technical comment and made part of the
recirculation. (copy below) There
has been no response from that voter.
Given that there are no new no
votes and no changes required to the draft,
I will be making a motion to
the SEC, via a 10 day letter ballot, to
forward Draft 9 to RevCom in
time for the May 2 submission deadline.
Comment received on Draft 8
and recirculated with Draft 9:
CommenterName CommentType CommentID
Clause Subclause Page Line
O'Farrell, Timothy
T
8
D 89
Comment
The source code of
Appendix D is provided without a flow diagram schematic.
To enhance
understanding and accessibility of the program material a flow
diagram
schematic is required.
SuggestedRemedy
Include a flow diagram schematic
of the source code presented in Appendix D.
Response
REJECT.
The BRC
does not know of any requirements to supply a flow diagram for
code,
therefore one will not be created and included. BRC does not consider
this a
technical comment on the draft, since it relates to a informative
annex.
|