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

Re: [802.3_4PPOE] TDL - Use of word channel in clause 33



Christian-

So your argument is that:
we should use a term that is undefined in our standard for defining precise quantities incorrectly
over
using a precisely defined term for defining precise quantities correctly

...because even if it is formally correct, it makes the text verbose?

I do not accept that argument.
Particularly since it throws the methodology for the cabling measurement into question.

I would rather purge the incorrect and/o misleading uses of channel from the clause.

Geoff

On Jan 5, 2017, at 7:26 AMPST, Christian BEIA <christian.beia@xxxxxx> wrote:

Geoff,
 
The word “channel” is widely used in Clause 33, including the name of some specific parameters (e.g. Rchan - Channel DC loop resistance), and pictures ( e.g Figure 33–43)
In my opinion, replacing all those items’ names with “link section”, even if formally correct, makes the text verbose and less readable.
 
Thanks
Best regards
 
Christian
 
 
From: Geoff Thompson [mailto:thompson@xxxxxxxx] 
Sent: giovedì 5 gennaio 2017 16:07
To: Christian BEIA <christian.beia@xxxxxx>
Cc: Geoff Thompson <thompson@xxxxxxxx>; STDS-802-3-4PPOE@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [802.3_4PPOE] TDL - Use of word channel in clause 33
 
Christian-
 
Why do you feel that a new term is needed that is precisely equivalent to the definition of the well established term "link section"?
 
Geoff
 
On Jan 5, 2017, at 5:58 AMPST, Christian BEIA <christian.beia@xxxxxx> wrote:
 
Hi all,
I prepared a short baseline document in support of comment #26, which addresses my action item in the TDL.
Please review and comment.
 
Thanks
Christian
 
 
<Use of word channel in clause 33 rev01.docx>
 
<Use of word channel in clause 33 rev01.docx>