Re: [802SEC] FW: new work
Mat,
If you already have the separate files, why do they need to be combined
and balloted together? I would rather that these be balloted
separately. It makes it easier to read and to comment on them for the
balloters.
-Bob
-----Original Message-----
From: Sherman, Matthew J. (US SSA)
[mailto:matthew.sherman@BAESYSTEMS.COM]
Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2005 8:18 AM
To: STDS-802-SEC@listserv.ieee.org
Subject: [802SEC] FW: new work
Folks,
Just so you have an idea of what I will be 'batching', here are some of
the proposed changes from ML. In addition I will have a recommended
change from Geoff on the adding of 'proprietary' footers etc. on e-mail
and other contributions. I will be the EC member proposing the ballots.
What I will do is present to the EC on Friday each 'rationale' and step
through the changes quickly. If there is substantial objection to
balloting a specific change, I will divide the question and vote that
specific rationale and proposed change separately. Hopefully this will
make for a more efficient process. Again, if people think this is a bad
idea, please let me know.
Mat
Matthew Sherman, Ph.D.
Senior Member Technical Staff
BAE SYSTEMS, CNIR
Office: +1 973.633.6344
email: matthew.sherman@baesystems.com
-----Original Message-----
From: m.nielsen@ieee.org [mailto:m.nielsen@ieee.org]
Sent: Wednesday, July 20, 2005 8:19 PM
To: Sherman, Matthew J. (US SSA)
Subject: new work
OK, Mat, here's my cut at the new work, in four documents:
WG Structure
Study Groups
WG ballot recircs
Clause 9
LMK what you think. I will check email later tonight and will be at work
tomorrow.
ml
(See attached file: 802.0-ballot-recircs--D1.doc)(See attached file:
802.0-sect-9--D1.doc)(See attached file: 802.0-SG_Process--D1.doc)(See
attached file: 802.0-WG_Structure--D1.doc)
----------
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.