|Thread Links||Date Links|
|Thread Prev||Thread Next||Thread Index||Date Prev||Date Next||Date Index|
Here are few comments
Change to "proposals will not imply implementation" - since we are the ones working on the objective - "will not" seems more apt that "should not"
Just for readability sake, I would change it to "To present the above devices in matrix form and determine combinations that need to operate and those that need special treatment"
New text on slide 7 should say "…will list the proposed compatibility…."
The proposed text in your "details of change" document is different from what the presentation has. I would not mind if we remove this text on the whole – makes things simpler
Row 5 in the table can be contentious - just because standard uses the term "require" instead of "receive" doesn’t mean it allows "received" - David Law might be able to help us here. We can discuss it during tomorrow's meeting.
I still feel, what Dave Abramson sent was simpler – I prefer adopting that.
Notes section needs to be reworded in few places – we can go over it during the meeting.
From: "Darshan, Yair" <YDarshan@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Reply-To: "Darshan, Yair" <YDarshan@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 29 Jun 2013 02:19:31 +0300
Subject: [802.3_4PPOE] IEEE802.3 4P - Compatibility Matrix Ad-Hoc, updated meeting material.
Please see attached the results of a meeting with David Law, Fred Schindler and Yair Darshan on June 27-2013 prior the 2nd ad-hoc on July 2-2013. The purpose of the meeting was to respond to comments send by Fred Schindler, address them for helping building consensus.
Two documents are attached:
a) details of the changes with their rational. Please review it and if you have issues with it please respond over the reflector or discuss it at the next ad-hoc.
b) The presentation attached includes the changes marked in blue.
Power over HDBaseT Subcommittee
Chief R&D Engineer
Analog Mixed Signal Group
1 Hanagar St., P.O. Box 7220