Re: [802SEC] approved drafts removed from draft sale catalog
In the conversation that ensued, I believe that I mentioned that the drafts
could be watermarked in the PDF and that staff had already said that
watermarking was a very lightweight process when Bob Davis and I were
investigating how to change status on existing PDFs with regard to
In other words, I believe our conclusion (not necessarily shared by staff)
was that the "effort" was a red herring.
At 11:29 PM 7/6/2004 -0600, Roger B. Marks wrote:
>The EC opening meeting minutes of March 15 include the slides from
>Karen's "Get IEEE 802 Update 9". It says (page 29 of the minutes):
>No more approved drafts after 1 June 2004
>*Shorter publication periods
> -Average down to 4-6 weeks
> -Redirect effort to drafts and standards
>*Revenue doesn't justify effort
>As I recall, this issue came up during a meeting with Karen (the 802
>Task Force, I think) during the week. I believe that I asked for a
>quantification of the effort required to remove a draft in the
>catalog once approved, as compared to the effort required to remove
>it from the catalog once published. I think Karen had an explanation,
>but I don't recall it.
>At 18:18 -0700 2004-07-06, Howard Frazier wrote:
>>I notice that the draft in question appears on the following page
>>with a link to
>>Does this indicate that the draft is available as part of the
>>Local and Metropolitan Area Networks + Drafts (LAN/MAN 802s)
>>The page purports that:
>> This is a continuously updated collection of IEEE 802 approved standards,
>> and IEEE Unapproved 802 draft standards. This subscription has the
>> - Approved Standards
>> - Unapproved Drafts.
>> - Archived Standards
>>Does this mean that approved drafts should not be included on the page?
>>Does "Approved Standard" mean "As approved and published by the IEEE-SA"?
>>The page also indicates that IEEE P802.16-REVd/D5 is an Unapproved draft.
>>It appears that a certain amount of confusion persists in the matter
>>of making drafts available for sale. I had hoped we were past this.
>>I either missed hearing, or I have forgotten that I heard, that drafts
>>would not be sold after a standard was approved. In the past, it has
>>certainly been the case that we have made the draft available for sale
>>until the standard was published. Maybe this explains why the
>>print and pdf revenues are so far below the budget for this year.
>>Roger B. Marks wrote:
>>>I have received an inquiry from someone who is unable to find
>>>P802.16-REVd/D5 for sale on the drafts page.
>>>Since it was formerly for sale, I assume that it must have been
>>>removed under the policy we learned of in March - the policy that
>>>approved drafts are removed from the catalog.
>>>Could you please remind me of the benefits of pulling such drafts
>>>from the catalog?
>>>Can you suggest the best means to deliver the content of the approved
>>>draft to users needing access to it before publication? In my case,
>>>publication is scheduled about two months from now, and that is not a
>>>practical delay for many people.
>>>This email is sent from the 802 Executive Committee email
>>>reflector. This list is maintained by Listserv.
>This email is sent from the 802 Executive Committee email reflector. This
>list is maintained by Listserv.
This email is sent from the 802 Executive Committee email reflector. This list is maintained by Listserv.