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

Re: P1788: PLEASE VOTE - M 49 & 50

To: "Hossam A. H. Fahmy" <hfahmy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: P1788: PLEASE VOTE - M 49 & 50
From: Jean-Pierre Merlet <Jean-Pierre.Merlet@xxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2013 18:11:45 +0200
Cc: "Corliss, George" <george.corliss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, IEEEP1788a <stds-1788@xxxxxxxx>
Delivered-to: mhonarc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <1380210785.3729.19.camel@rahmah.home.personal>
List-help: <https://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: INRIA
References: <2244C901-89E9-4EA9-9B58-A178A03EA358@Marquette.edu> <1380210785.3729.19.camel@rahmah.home.personal>
Reply-to: Jean-Pierre.Merlet@xxxxxxxx
Sender: stds-1788@xxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130311 Thunderbird/17.0.4

 I vote YES on motion 49 (Function accuracy).

 I vote NO on motion 50 (EDP).

Motion 50 have strong arguments but divert us from a (relatively)simple, applicable standard and there many others issues of sameimportance that should then also be addressed..


Best

JPM

References:
- P1788: PLEASE VOTE - M 49 & 50
  - From: Corliss, George
- Re: P1788: PLEASE VOTE - M 49 & 50
  - From: Hossam A. H. Fahmy

Prev by Date: Re: re motion 50 (Just to you...)
Next by Date: Re: P1788: PLEASE VOTE - M 49 & 50
Previous by thread: Re: P1788: PLEASE VOTE - M 49 & 50
Next by thread: Motion M0050.01 EDP without CA
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread