|Thread Links||Date Links|
|Thread Prev||Thread Next||Thread Index||Date Prev||Date Next||Date Index|
I have not looked at the package, but Bob's comments concern me regarding
your odds at REVCOM. In particular the concept of "an author's
representative" is foreign to the concept of individual participation as
refined by the SA. If it becomes the perception of REVCOM that
misunderstanding of the basic concepts has polluted your comment resolution
process then it could be hard on you and the approval of your package.
I'm not sure what the remedy is without looking into the package more
deeply but I can see hints of a deeper problem with the package than just
At 02:40 PM 5/26/2005 , Grow, Bob wrote:
>I'm troubled some by the responses that have very light justification
>for rejection and wonder if they will be sufficient for RevCom. One
>comment though has me very confused. Comment #106 is "Superceded, See
>comment #105", but #105 is "Rejected, The author's representative
>requested the comment to be rejected due to lack of harmonization".
>That is too many levels of indirection for me to feel comfortable. How
>is a comment from person A superceded by a comment from B (I did notice
>the similarity of suggested remedy) and consequently effectively is
>rejected by request of person C?
>Could you explain this better? Perhaps "lack of harmonization" is too
>cryptic for me to find a significant reason for rejection.
>[mailto:owner-stds-802-sec@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG] On Behalf Of Roger B.
>Sent: Wednesday, May 25, 2005 9:46 PM
>Subject: [802SEC] +++EC Email Ballot+++ENDS 5 MAY+++ conditional
>approval: IEEE P802.16-2004/Cor1 to Sponsor Ballot
>Dear EC Members,
>This is a email ballot to make a determination on the motion:
>"To grant conditional approval to forward, for Sponsor Ballot, IEEE
>P802.16-2004/Cor1, a draft corrigendum to IEEE Std 802.16-2004."
>Moved: Roger Marks
>Second: Bob O'Hara
>The ballot opens 25 May 2005 and closes
>5 June 2005 at 11:59 pm ET.
>Paul has asked me to conduct this ballot. Please reply to
>I would like to make a motion for an electronic EC ballot to grant
>conditional approval to forward, for Sponsor Ballot, IEEE
>P802.16-2004/Cor1, a draft corrigendum to IEEE Std 802.16-2004. The
>conditional approval is requested under Clause 21 of the IEEE 802 P&P.
>Bob O'Hara has agreed to second the motion.
>The ballot schedule follows:
> WG Letter Ballot #17: 11 Feb - 13 Mar 2005
> WG Recirc Ballot #17a: 5 Apr - 22 Apr 2005
> WG Recirc Ballot #17b: 23 May - 7 Jun 2005
>The recirc ballot announcement:
>includes the statement: "This ballot is being conducted under the
>procedure for conditional approval of the LMSC Policies and Procedures
>[IEEE PROJECT 802 LAN MAN STANDARDS COMMITTEE (LMSC) POLICIES AND
>The current ballot status is:
> 167 Approve
> 7 Disapprove
> 5 Abstain
> 96% Approval Ratio (167/174)
> 81% Return Ratio (179/220)
>Details are at <http://ieee802.org//16/maint/ballot17/report17.html>.
>The remaining Technical Disapprove comments, and responses, are here:
>The comments labeled "IEEE 802.16-05/015r3" in the upper right corner
>were submitted in the initial ballot and then recirculated. Those
>labeled "IEEE 802.16-05/021r3" were submitted during the first recirc
>and are currently being recirculated.
>A relevant WG Motion of 5 May 2005 was approved by vote of 64-0 at the
>802.16 WG interim: "To accept draft P802.16-2004/Cor1/D2 as modified by
>the comment resolutions (IEEE 802.16-05/021r2) and open a Working Group
>Confirmation Letter Ballot on that Draft (P802.16-2004/Cor1/D3), and to
>request conditional approval to the 802 EC to forward the draft to
>I am requesting conditional approval now so that Sponsor Ballot can be
>concluded before the July Plenary.
>Dr. Roger B. Marks <mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org> +1 303 497 7837
>National Institute of Standards and Technology/Boulder, CO, USA
>Chair, IEEE 802.16 Working Group on Broadband Wireless Access
>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.