Thread Links
Date Links
Thread Prev
Thread Next
Thread Index
Date Prev
Date Next
Date Index
P1788 Motion M0021.22 No
To
:
owner-stds-1788@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject
: P1788 Motion M0021.22 No
From
: "Michael Schulte" <
schulte@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
Date
: Thu, 9 Dec 2010 18:40:50 -0600
Cc
: <
stds-1788@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
Delivered-to
:
mhonarc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to
: <
AANLkTi=9jr6GnfY=kDwYW-LYjRpvbTEnmj2g5iBJFFpk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
List-help
: <
http://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?LIST=STDS-1788
>, <
mailto:LISTSERV@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG?body=INFO%20STDS-1788
>
List-owner
: <
mailto:STDS-1788-request@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
>
List-subscribe
: <
mailto:STDS-1788-subscribe-request@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
>
List-unsubscribe
: <
mailto:STDS-1788-unsubscribe-request@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
>
Organization
: University of Wisconsin
References
: <
4D00EDA8.6060100@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> <
AANLkTi=9jr6GnfY=kDwYW-LYjRpvbTEnmj2g5iBJFFpk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
Reply-to
: <
schulte@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
Sender
:
stds-1788@xxxxxxxx
Thread-index
: AcuXzEb4WE7VzNPGSl2j/uzHJvEbWQANm9rw
I vote NO on Motion 21.2, since would add unnecessary complexity to the standard.
References
:
RE: P1788 Motion M0021.22 No
From:
Kathy Gerber
Re: P1788 Motion M0021.22 No
From:
M Affan Zidan
Prev by Date:
Motion P1788/M0021.2:YES
Next by Date:
Re: P1788 Motion M0021.22 No
Previous by thread:
Re: P1788 Motion M0021.22 No
Next by thread:
Re: P1788 Motion M0021.22 No
Index(es):
Date
Thread