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

Re: [RPRWG] Could we discard old (often obsolete) comments?




David, many of us submitted comments under the assumption that our old
unaddressed comments would still stand.  It is now too late to discard them
for draft 0.2.  However, at next week's meeting we can decide how to proceed
for the next draft.

Best regards,

Robert D. Love
President, Resilient Packet Ring Alliance
President, LAN Connect Consultants
7105 Leveret Circle     Raleigh, NC 27615
Phone: 919 848-6773       Mobile: 919 810-7816
email: rdlove@xxxxxxxx          Fax: 208 978-1187
----- Original Message -----
From: "David V. James" <dvj@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <Tom_Alexander@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: <stds-802-17@xxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, May 01, 2002 11:11 PM
Subject: [RPRWG] Could we discard old (often obsolete) comments?


>
> Tom,
>
> I would like to suggest that we discard unaddressed comments
> (which were skipped due to lack of time) from draft 0.1 when
> we move on to D0.2. Instead, can we let the owner of these
> comments resubmit them with revised page, line, section, and
> (if necessary) technical content?
>
> On my last comments, I originally planned to just resubmit
> them with revised page/line/section numbers. However, by the
> time I reviewed them, the technical comments often changed.
> Even when the technical content remained stable, it was easy
> enough to cut-and-past the old comment into the new.
>
> This would seem to save you some time, not having to deal
> with old (and possibly no longer relevant) comments. Saving
> the groups time would also be valuable. I'm the one that has
> the most comments on record (and therefore most likely to
> complain), and its my preference. So, hopefully no one else
> would complain.
>
> If this isn't possible, in general, can I request it be applied
> to my comments in specific (it technically possible, of course).
> I think discarding my D0.1 comments would allow for a more
> effecient addressing of D0.2 comments. Any minor missed topics
> will be a small percentage and (if any) can be addressed through
> the next round of comments.
>
> Thanks!
> DVJ
>
> BTW, John Lemon supplied the Frame sources for D0.2, so I don't
> need them any more. However, it could help contributors (in general)
> prepare drop-in text if these were generally available.
>
>
> David V. James, PhD
> Chief Architect
> Network Processing Solutions
> Data Communications Division
> Cypress Semiconductor
> 110 Nortech Parkway
> San Jose, CA 95134
> Work: +1.408.942.2010
> Cell: +1.650.954.6906
> Fax:  +1.408.942.2099
> Work: djz@xxxxxxxxxxx
> Base: dvj@xxxxxxxxxxxx
>