I correct myself Re: compressed intervals and Motion 42
Juergen, P-1788,
I apologize for my confusion: Motion 42 does indeed
deal with the entire decoration system, including
compressed interval arithmetic. My mistake was
to only look at the "Decoration System" column of
the table of motions at
http://grouper.ieee.org/groups/1788/private/Motions/AllMotions.html
and not at the "Details" My confusion originated
in the fact that most of the links in the first
column contained the official motion and most of
the links in the second column contain a "rationale,"
or reason for the motion, and not the actual motion.
That is, the motion consists of clause 8.8, in
addition to clauses 5 and 6. Thus, Juergen's
sentiment concerning compressed decorations
(see the appended email) is
indeed relevant to Motion 42.
Is this everyone's understanding?
John is presently making modifications to Motion 42, and
we will begin voting on it once he posts these modifications.
If I receive no objections, John will separate out the parts
concerning compressed intervals, and we will vote on that
part separately.
Sincerely,
Baker
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Jürgen -- please clarify -- Re: compressed intervals
Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2013 12:08:11 -0600
From: Ralph Baker Kearfott <rbk@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Reply-To: rbk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Organization: University of Louisiana at Lafayette
To: Jürgen Wolff v Gudenberg <wolff@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
CC: 'stds-1788' <stds-1788@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Jürgen (and P-1788 FYI),
I am a bit confused by your comment (appended). The only
mention of compressed intervals in any of the motions
presently under discussion (42) or under vote (40 and 41) is
in Motion 41, in the last paragraph of 2.5. Motion 41 is
under vote under the rules for actual standards text.
Your statement appears to apply to a larger part of the
document than the relevant parts of the motions presently
being processed. We can certainly take your comments
into account, and apply separate voting on compressed
intervals to the relevant individual parts of the document
as those parts come up for discussion and vote. However,
it cannot apply to Motion 41, since that motion is presently
under vote.
Thus, please clarify: Is your vote on Motion 41 "Yes" or
"No, but I'll vote 'Yes' if ..."?
Baker
On 01/12/2013 02:41 PM, Jürgen Wolff von Gudenberg wrote:
.
.
.
John
I urge you the delete everything on compressed interval arithmetc out of the
final version which we will vote on. Or even better make 2 parts out of the text with separate voting.
Otherwise I promise to vote "NO"
Juergen
--
---------------------------------------------------------------
Ralph Baker Kearfott, rbk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx (337) 482-5346 (fax)
(337) 482-5270 (work) (337) 993-1827 (home)
URL: http://interval.louisiana.edu/kearfott.html
Department of Mathematics, University of Louisiana at Lafayette
(Room 217 Maxim D. Doucet Hall, 1403 Johnston Street)
Box 4-1010, Lafayette, LA 70504-1010, USA
---------------------------------------------------------------