Re: [802SEC] New Model for IEEE Standards Maintenance
Tony:
I have been working with publication staff on publishing all amendments, corrigenda and errata as editions. Publication staff has been generally favorable to this, the only identified negative is product pricing (why do I have to pay for all 3500 pages of 802.3 when I already have it and only want the new 50 pages).
If you or others are interested, I can provide details on what I've proposed. I'm certainly willing to accept support, and constructive criticism as well for any IEEE-SA participants.
Your proposal to do editions at least every three mitigates the pricing issue because a revision presents the same situation.
--Bob
-----Original Message-----
From: ***** IEEE 802 Executive Committee List ***** [mailto:STDS-802-SEC@ieee.org] On Behalf Of Tony Jeffree
Sent: Wednesday, February 02, 2011 4:03 AM
To: STDS-802-SEC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [802SEC] New Model for IEEE Standards Maintenance
Reflecting on this new model, I have a couple of observations.
As I said on the conference call, I don't believe that the changes as
outlined are of any great benefit (or dis-benefit for that matter) to 802,
which seems to be a wasted opportunity when I believe that a simple change
COULD be made that would actually be of benefit.
I have never understood the point of the 3-year revision rule - apparently
it is OK to have a gozillion amendments approved in years 1-3 after a
revision, and all is OK for those 3 years, but suddenly at the end of year
3, it is not-OK anymore. That makes no sense to me whatever, and will make
even less sense once the revision cycle moves to 10 years.
What would make far more sense to me would be to lose the 3-year revision
rule, and instead, impose a requirement to produce an Edition when there are
N amendments (where N probably equals 3) that haven't previously been
incorporated into a revision or an edition. That would materially improve my
situation in 802.1, as it would remove an arbitrary requirement to revise
after 3 years when an editorial roll-up would be entirely sufficient to the
needs both of the readership and the WG. Producing editions on a regular
basis is in any case something that I try to do with 802.1Q already.
Regards,
Tony
----------
This email is sent from the 802 Executive Committee email reflector. This list is maintained by Listserv.
----------
This email is sent from the 802 Executive Committee email reflector. This list is maintained by Listserv.