Submission doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/0970r1 Slide 1 802.11 WG Editor’s Meeting (Sept ‘10) Date:...

Submission

doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/0970r1

Slide 1

802.11 WG Editor’s Meeting (Sept ‘10)

Date: 2010-08-11

Name Affiliation Address Phone email Peter Ecclesine Cisco Systems 170 W. Tasman Dr.,

MS SJ-14-4, San Jose, CA 95134-1706

+1-408-527-0815 [email protected]

Authors:

Peter Ecclesine (Cisco Systems)

Submission

doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/0970r1

Abstract

This document contains agenda/minutes/actions/status as prepared/recorded at the IEEE 802.11 Editors’ Meeting

Slide 2 Peter Ecclesine (Cisco Systems)

Submission

doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/0970r1

Slide 3

Agenda for 2010-09-14

• Roll Call / Contacts / Reflector

• Go round table and get brief status report

• Review action items from previous meeting

• Numbering Alignment process

• Editors page discussion

• Amendment Ordering / ANA Status / Draft Snapshots

• MIB style and Frame practices (FrameMaker 9.0)

• Scope and Purpose statements

• Style Guide for 802.11


Submission

doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/0970r1

Slide 4

Roll Call – 2010-09-14• Editor’s Present

• P802.11mb Amendment (REVmb) – Adrian Stephens• P802.11s Amendment (MESH) –Kazuyuki Sakoda• P802.11ad Amendment (VHT60) – Carlos Cordeiro• P802.11ae Amendment (QosMan) – Henry Ptasinski• P802.11af Amendment (TVWS) – Peter Ecclesine

• 802.11 Editor’s Not Present

• P802.11u Amendment (IW) -- Necati Canpolat• P802.11v Amendment (WNM) – Emily Qi

• P802.11z Amendment (TDLS) – Menzo Wentink• P802.11aa Amendment (VTS) – Hang Liu

• Also present:

– Alex Ashley (P802.11aa)– Bill Marshall– Clint Chaplin– Tom Siep

• IEEE Staff present and always welcome!

• IEEE Staff not present and always welcome! – Kim Breitfelder – manager publishing, [email protected]?– Michael Kipness – our staff liaison, [email protected]?– Michelle Turner – staff editor for 802, [email protected]

• Note: editors request that an IEEE staff member should be present at least during Plenary meetings


Submission

doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/0970r1

Slide 5

Volunteer Editor Contacts• TGs – Kazuyuki Sakoda - [email protected]

• TGu – Necati Canpolat – [email protected]

• TGv – Emily Qi – [email protected]

• TGz – Menzo Wentink– [email protected]

• TGmb – Adrian Stephens – [email protected]

• TGaa – Hang Liu – [email protected]

• TGad – Carlos Cordeiro – [email protected]

• TGae – Henry Ptasinski – [email protected]

• Tgaf – Peter Ecclesine – [email protected]

• Editor Emeritus:

– TGk – Joe Kwak– [email protected]

– TGn – Adrian Stephens – [email protected]

– TGp – Wayne Fisher – [email protected]

– TGr – Bill Marshall – [email protected]

– TGw – Nancy Cam-Winget – [email protected]

– TGy – Peter Ecclesine – [email protected]


Submission

doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/0970r1

Round table status report

• REVmb –completed LB167 comment resolution, received MEC comments, believe will start Sponsor Ballot end of Sept

• 11s – in LB166 comment resolution, Believe that Sponsor Ballot will begin after Professional Editing is completed.

• 11u – Completed Sponsor Ballot comment resolution,

• 11v – in recirc Sponsor Ballot comment resolution, Will recirc

• 11z – Completed Sponsor Ballot comment resolution,

• 11aa – in LB164 comment resolution, Hope to recirc in 2 weeks

• 11ad – in technical comment resolution, Going to WG letter ballot

• 11ae – D0.01 technical review, hope to start WG letter ballot

• 11af – D0.05 in internal review, hope to WG after Nov meetiog


Submission

doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/0970r1

Reflector Updates

• Each editor is expected to be on the reflector and current.

• If you didn’t receive the meeting notice from the reflector, please send email to [email protected]

• To be updated:– None


Submission

doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/0970r1

Slide 8

IEEE Publication Status

• Publications completed for 802.11k, 802.11r and 802.11y, 802.11n and 802.11w– 11k now available with Get802

– 11r now available with Get802

– 11y now available with Get802

– 11w now available with Get802

– 11n now available with Get802

• Publication of 11p announced July 16th


Submission

doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/0970r1

MEC Status• P802.11mb D5.0 has gone through Mandatory Editorial

Coordination in August 2010See 11-10-1070-00-000m-revmb MEC comments.doc


Submission

doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/0970r1

Numbering Alignment Process

• Update from all published standards. Posted as 11-08/644r17 By Bill Marshall

• TGz started a new update cycle. 11v, 11u, numbering needs to be completed. 11s is the next.

• Create a working group MEC that includes numbering and ANA before going to Sponsor Ballot

• We use more columns for the two baselines.

Slide 10Slide 10 Peter Ecclesine (Cisco Systems)

Submission

doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/0970r1

Amendment & other ordering notes

• Editors define publication order independent of working group public timelines:– Since official timeline is volatile and moves around

– Publication order helps provide stability in amendment numbering, figures, clauses and other numbering assignments

– Editors are committed to maintain a rational publication order

• Numbering spreadsheet 08/0644:– Succeeding amendments to do their respective updates

– Must match the official timeline after plenaries

– We are seeing problems in MIB numbering, and say at end of WG LB, our internal MEC insists that the numbering spreadsheet is correct


Submission

doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/0970r1

Slide 12

ANA Announcements• Current ANA announced to group is 802.11-09-0031r12. (8/10/2010)

– See https://mentor.ieee.org/802.11/file/08/11-09-0031-09-0000-ana-database-assigned-numbers.xls

– All new requests received by end of meeting will be uploaded and announced via 802.11 WG reflector

• Procedure for ANA is contained in 07/0827r0.– See http://mentor.ieee.org/802.11/public/07/11-07-0827-00-0000-assigned-number-authority-ana-mechanisms.ppt

• Editorial Guidance– ANA assignments should be done before the time of moving from WG LB to

Sponsor ballot.

– If a resource number is not in the ANA Database, please use <ANA> in drafts!

– Editors to replace any ANA controlled resources numbers with <ANA> upon incorporation of material into drafts.

– ANA will control SMT, Groups, could use TG-specific numbering until going to Sponsor Ballot


Submission

doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/0970r1

Editors page

• http://www.ieee802.org/11/editor_resources.html

• Comments or changes?

May 2010

Peter Ecclesine (Cisco Systems)Slide 13

Submission

doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/0970r1

Slide 14

Editor Amendment Ordering

Amendment Number Task Group REVCOM Date

802.11 Amendment 7 TGz Sept 2010

802.11 Amendment 8 TGv Sept 2010

802.11 Amendment 9 TGu Dec 2010

802.11 Revision 802.11mb June 2011?

802.11-2011 Amendment 1 TGs June 2011?

802.11-2011 Amendment 2 TGae Sept 2012

802.11-2011 Amendment 3 TGaf Dec 2011

802.11-2011 Amendment 4 TGaa Mar 2012

802.11-2011 Amendment 5 TGad Dec 2012

802.11-2011 Amendment 6 TGac Dec 2012?

• Data as of September 2010• See http://grouper.ieee.org/groups/802/11/Reports/802.11_Timelines.htm

Amendment numbering is editorial! No need to make ballot comments on these dynamic numbers!


Submission

doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/0970r1

FrameMaker V9 transition

• January 2011 IEEE-SA will use FrameMaker 9.0 exclusively for drafts submitted in FrameMaker

• Does not affect 11u, 11v and 11z

• 802.11 editors want to have Visio version of each figure to go into the rollup. Will work with non-windows editors on their figures.

May 2010


Submission

doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/0970r1

Slide 16

Email Your Draft Status Updates

• Each editor, please send update for next page via the editor’s reflector no later than Thursday am2 to update table on next page!


Submission

doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/0970r1

Most current doc shaded green.

TG Published or Draft Baseline DocumentsSource MEC

Style Guide Editor

Snapshot Date

Published

p z v u mb s ae af aa ad ac

z Y 11.0

11.0

Frame 7.2 Yes 2009 Menzo Wentink 17-July

v Y 11.0

7.0 10.0 Frame 7.2 Yes 2007 Emily Qi 18-May

u Y 11.0

7.0 11.0 10.0 Frame 7.2 Yes 2007 Necati Canpolat 14-July

mb Y 6.0 Frame 7.2 Yes 2009 Adrian Stephens 14-Sept

s Y 2010

11.0

13.0 10.0 4.0 7.0 Frame 8.0 No 2009 Kazuyuki Sakoda 14-Sept

ae Henry Ptasinski 15-July

af Y 5.0 6.0 0.05 Frame 7.1 No 2009 Peter Ecclesine 14-Sept

aa Y 11.0

9.0 11.0 9.0 5.0 1.0 1.0 Word No 2009 Hang Liu 14-July

ad Y 11.0

11.0

10.0 9.0 4.0 5.0 0.1 1.0 0.1 Word No 2009 Carlos Cordeiro 14-July

ac

Changes from last report shown in red.

Slide 17

Sept 2010 Draft Development Snapshot


Submission

doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/0970r1

MIB style, Visio and Frame practices

• I’m going to suggest going forward we use a single style with appropriately set tabs, and use leading Tabs to distinguish the syntax and description parts. (Adrian Stephens Feb 9, 2010)

• Keep embedded figures using visio as long as possible– Near the end of sponsor ballot, turn these all into .wmf (windows

meta file) format files (you can do this from visio using “save as”). Keep separate files for the .vsd source and the .wmf file that is linked to from frame.

• Frame templates for 11aa, 11ac, 11ad, 11ae, 11af

Mar 2010


Submission

doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/0970r1

802.11 Style Guide

• See 11-09-1034-00-0000-wg11-style-guide.doc


Submission

doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/0970r1

Conference Calls

• Are they of any value?

• Next Meeting: Nov 12-17, Dallas

• Any need for conference calls?


Submission

doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/0970r1

Pre-RevCom IEEE-SA Review

• Possibly near the end of Working Group Letter Ballot (3rd recirc or 4th recirc) , we will offer the draft to the publications editor for review. This allows ambiguities and errors to be addressed in Sponsor Ballot by comments, rather than discover the ambiguities and errors after RevCom.

• It appears that during MEC is the least risky time for a publication editor’s review.

• TGs Draft 7.0 went to LB166 out of July plenary, and by agreement with ExCom and IEEE SA staff, will go for professional editing for ~50 days, after which Draft 8.0 will be available to start Sponsor Ballot.

Mar 2010


Submission

doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/0970r1

Two Technical Editors

• Peter Ecclesine will run the face to face meetings

• Adrian Stephens will run the publication process

• Adrian Stephens is the ANA administrator

• All are on the Editor’s email list.

Mar 2010


Submission

doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/0970r1

Reference Material


Submission

doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/0970r1

Slide 24

Editorial Streamlining• Focus is on consistency across all TGs:

– Completed• Streamlined ANA processes – 07/0827r0• Consistent format for REDLINE contributions across TGs – 07/0788r0 • Consistent process for editorial comment resolution across TGs (WG & Sponsor) –

07/2050r0– Guideline for technical vs. editorial, sample editorial comment responses

• Format for comment reporting across TGs (WG & Sponsor) – 07/1990r0 (tool in 07/2116r0)

• Stable numbering method (See 07/2810r0)• Consistent naming of redlines (See 07/2810r0)• Draft templates for FRAME (no Word) to help train new editors more rapidly

– Under Construction (in priority order)1. Revise the editor’s guideline – comments on 09/1034?2. Mentoring program – Name a mentor for each new editor3. Request in future Plenary sessions Mondays 7:30pm Frame surgery 4. MIB element numbering and compiling – publish a rolled-up MIB of k/r/y5. Guideline on non-technical front matter6. Guideline describing expected editorial development and maturity of draft through

stages in 802.11 for consistency across TGs7. Guidelines for primitives – ARC to consider


Submission

doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/0970r1

Numbering of Annexes and Clauses

• Proposal: TGMb will fix the ordering of annexes– Ample bad precedent set by 11k

– Bibliography should be the first or final annex per IEEE Standards Style Guide

• Clause numbering has similar issue during rollup– TGn clause 3a, 11r clause 11a, 11y clause 11.9a

• REVmb numbering will stay using “Amendment style” numbering until the very last possible moment before going to Sponsor Ballot.


Submission

doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/0970r1

Draft naming convention• Drafts and redlines are .pdf files• Syntax: Draft <project>_<draft> [Redline [Compared to <project>_<draft>]].pdf

• Examples:

• Draft P802.11n_D8.0.pdf• Draft P802.11n_D8.0 Redline.pdf• Draft P802.11n_D7.04 Redline Compared to P802.11n_D7.03.pdf

Please use this convention for all drafts posted on the 802.11 website.


Submission

doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/0970r1

Lessons Learned from RevCom

During Sponsor ballot… (see 09/1058r1)

• Minimise cross references (“disagree – see CID 1234”)– Because not all CIDs are included in the “unsatisfied comments” listing,

so this may end up a dangling reference.

– Copy resolution + add (“same as resoution for CID 1234”)

• Provide full URLs for doc references– Because some members of RevCom and the Sponsor Pool may not be

familiar with how to get to Mentor

• Minimise use of doc references– Cut and paste from reference doc, where-ever possible. This minimises

work for sponsor ballot members getting reference documents.

– Easier to audit process


Submission

doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/0970r1

Publication Work PlanNote: to be included in the editor’s operations manual

Here is the workflow we have used for a number of years with IEEE staff on publication of 802.11 publications:

1. Editors provide FRAME source and any freestanding graphics (Powerpoint, Visio. TIF) to staff at time of REVCOM submission.

2. Editors provide a list of requests editorial corrections no later than REVCOM approval date.

3. Staff prepares a publication draft and highlights changes they have made and questions they need addressed or confirmed. This draft is sent to Task Group Editor and the Working Group Technical Editor (me). This typically occurs about 2-3 weeks after approval for publication, since the preparation work is usually (but not always) begun ahead of approval. This is also typically the draft peer reviewed by IEEE staff.

4. The Task Group Editor responds to all questions on domain specific questions, with copy to Working Group editor (me). This typically takes about 3-5 days.

5. The Working Group Technical Editor reviews responses from the Task Group editor, completes any responses, and provides a list of WG officers and voting members valid for the document as of the opening day of the Sponsor ballot. This typically only takes one additional day from the prior step as most of the work is done in parallel by the two editors.

6. Final draft is submitted by the IEEE staff to Working Group Technical Editor and Task Group Editor for sign-off. Any changes from the responses or IEEE peer review are highlighted and explained. This typically takes only one or two days more after the responses are received from the editors.

7. Task Group Editor gives final approval. No changes are expected. This usually occurs within 24 hours.

8. Working Group Technical Editor signs off and provides draft to Working Group Chair. No changes are expected. This usually occurs within 24 hours and in parallel with the previous step.

9. Working Group Chair sends email to sponsor and IEEE staff letting them know the Working Group has signed off on the publication process.


Submission

doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/0970r1

Terry Cole on Changes to MIB elements

• You can incrementally add to a MIB element without deprecation at any level. That is, add new values and meaning pairs.

•

• You can change the description of a MIB element without deprecation at any level. That is add new text clarifying or even changing the meaning of the element to keep up with the standard.

•

• I would advise deprecation when changing the definition of some value of a MIB from one thing to another. However, I don't know of any rules requiring this.


Submission

doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/0970r1

Publications: lessons learned

• When quoting baseline text inaccurately, the baseline text is changed whether or not the changes were marked. The IEEE staff will actually do the appropriate changes as if the task group had actually intended to change the baseline.– Drafts can minimally quote baseline text to minimize such changes– Should revisit the decision to include full context during insertion

• Full Annex titles have to be shown in the amendment; more importantly included “normative” vs. “informative”– TGk inadvertently changed Annex A to be fully informative– TGr battled to fix Annex A but caused ripples– TGy 08-1215r1 has brief review of significant things changed for

publication– In editor’s operations manual and during balloting, should comment that

Annexes should be fully titled with good reason to vote “No” in balloting


Submission

doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/0970r1

Publications: lessons learned (cont’d)

• Acronym rules are inconsistent– Styleguide doesn’t include definitions– Every document is treated as standalone, thus first acronym reference

must be spelled out. Even though, other amendments or baseline may have defined and used the acronym earlier.

– Goal should be to have as few changes between the final balloted amendment and final published amendment.

• How do we deal with subjective decisions made by the IEEE copy editors as their styles vary?

• Booleans should be capitalized: TRUE and FALSE– when “set to”

• Booleans should be lower case: is true and is false (raise the issue with Style Guide update)


Date post:	03-Jan-2016
Category:	Documents
Upload:	kerry-peters
View:	214 times
Download:	0 times