|Thread Links||Date Links|
|Thread Prev||Thread Next||Thread Index||Date Prev||Date Next||Date Index|
Yair – looks like there may be a few errors overlooked in the attached – see comments on the pdf. I won’t be in the room tomorrow.
Did you intend to delete the text defining faultAltA and faultAltB? (was the text deleted by mistake, or was the appropriate syntax not deleted?) – either way the appropriate syntax ends up undefined as you have it.
In other places there are new attributes defined for clause 145 which have duplicate names to those in clause 33. As I understand it (David Law or others may know better) attribute names need to be unique in a structure. The new attributes either should be conditions for incrementing the existing counters (when there is a clause 145 PSE instead of a clause 33) or they should have new names. I suspect it is the former.
George A. Zimmerman, Ph.D.
President & Principal Consultant
CME Consulting, Inc.
Experts in PHYsical Layer Communications
Please find proposed response for the above comments for the presentation tomorrow.
Chief R&D Engineer
Analog Mixed Signal Group
1 Hanagar St., P.O. Box 7220