Thread Links Date Links
Thread Prev Thread Next Thread Index Date Prev Date Next Date Index

Re: [10GMMF] Comment resolution process



Just some feedback on what has been done in previous generations.

1) This is generally performed by the editorial crew prior to the
meeting to help group comments and propose responses.
2) Not sure I understand what you mean by this, but I expect that this
is due to new-user growing pains. :-)
3) The response field can have any relevant information added.  When the
editorial crew goes through the comments for the first time, they should
be in "proposal mode".  The "final mode" is only used during Task Force
review of the comments.
4) As mentioned before, the editorial crew should be sure to be in
"proposal mode".  If they click any of the accept, accept in principle
or reject buttons, then the tool will list that the response is only a
proposed response.
5) This is generally how most editors do it, but it is highly
recommended that you go page-by-page first on the TR comments, then on
the T comments and finally on the E comments.  It is critical that the
Task Force respond first to the technical (TR & T) comments, as it is
common for the Task Force to give the editorial crew "editorial license"
on the E comments.
6) The comment generation tool will need to be downloaded to generate
comments for the draft.  This tool is only a run-time application.  As
for the comment resolution database, this could be investigated but the
ability to provide a database for people to follow along is dependent
upon the time available from volunteers to take on this effort.

Cheers,
Brad

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-stds-802-3-10gmmf@IEEE.ORG
[mailto:owner-stds-802-3-10gmmf@IEEE.ORG] On Behalf Of Lars E. Thon
Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 2004 2:35 PM
To: STDS-802-3-10GMMF@listserv.ieee.org
Subject: [10GMMF] Comment resolution process

All,

In the interest of not adding more questions and thereby delaying the
start of the comment process in the meeting (which is ongoing as I
type),
I thought I'd instead email some thoughts on the comment resolution
process.

David was just saying that we will be spending considerable time
on comment resolution from now on. Hopefully we can tune the process
a bit long the way.

Lars

------------------------------------------------------------------------
------
Some suggestions to streamline the comment resolution process:

1. A quick run-through to review the comments and their level of
controversy worked well, once we got started.

2. The comment resolution tool was nice, but we need to agree on
how to use it!

3. The "response" field should be updated with a clear and separate
marking of whether the comment is being flagged for additional
discussion before voting (level of controversy).

4. The response field also contains the editor's recommendation.
It should then also be marked clearly as such, to avoid confusion
with other text.

5. It would also help if we moved page-by-page (of the draft) for the
initial run-through, so that one can follow along in the draft more
easily, and related topics are seen together.

and finally:

6. Now that there is a new comment tool available, could we have the
tool and the current database available for download? I found it
sometimes difficult to follow the process without having the ability
to page around in the database myself. This is a smaller point, but it
might be useful at least to have the option.

Or is the whole tool being replaced by another web-based tool that
will also allow us to follow along in real time?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------