1. 802.11 WG Editor’s Meeting (Nov 09)
July 2007
Nov 2009
Nov 2009
WG Editor’s Meeting (Nov 09)
Date:
Authors:
Peter Ecclesine (Cisco Systems)
Peter Ecclesine (Cisco Systems)

2. Nov 2009
Nov 2009
Abstract
This document contains agenda/minutes/actions/status as prepared/recorded at the IEEE Editors’ Meeting
Peter Ecclesine (Cisco Systems)

3. Agenda for 2009-11-17 Roll Call / Contacts / Reflector
Nov 2009
July 2007
Nov 2009
Agenda for
Roll Call / Contacts / Reflector
Go round table and get brief status report
Review action items from previous meeting
Numbering Alignment process
Amendment Ordering / ANA Status / Draft Snapshots
Lessons learned from TGw/TGn RevCom
Lessons learned from initial editing of TGn
Style Guide for
Conference Calls
Peter Ecclesine (Cisco Systems)
Peter Ecclesine (Cisco Systems)

4. Roll Call – 2009-11-17 Nov 2009 July 2007 Nov 2009 Editor’s Present
P802.11mb Amendment (REVmb) – Adrian Stephens
P802.11n Amendment (HT) – Adrian Stephens
P802.11p Amendment (WAVE) – Wayne Fisher
P802.11z Amendment (TDLS) – Menzo Wentink
Also present:
Bill Marshall
Clint Chaplin
Editor’s Not Present
P802.11s Amendment (MESH) –Kazuyuki Sakoda (until end ‘09)
P802.11u Amendment (IW) -- Necati Canpolat
P802.11v Amendment (WNM) – Emily Qi
P802.11w Amendment (SEC) – Nancy Cam-Winget
P802.11y Amendment (CBP) – Peter Ecclesine
P802.11aa Amendment (VTS) – Hang Liu
IEEE Staff not present and always welcome!
Michelle Turner – staff editor for 802,
Kim Breitfelder – manager publishing,
Michael Kipness – our staff liaison,
Note: editors request that an IEEE staff member should be present at least during Plenary meetings
Michelle Turner is present at this plenary meeting
Peter Ecclesine (Cisco Systems)
Peter Ecclesine (Cisco Systems)

5. Volunteer Editor Contacts
Nov 2009
July 2007
Nov 2009
Volunteer Editor Contacts
TGn – Adrian Stephens –
TGp – Wayne Fisher –
TGs – Temporary: Kazuyuki Sakoda -
TGu – Necati Canpolat –
TGv – Emily Qi –
TGw – Nancy Cam-Winget –
TGz – Menzo Wentink–
TGmb – Adrian Stephens – (TBC)
TGaa – Hang Liu –
Editor Emeritus:
TGk – Joe Kwak–
TGr – Bill Marshall –
TGy – Peter Ecclesine –
Peter Ecclesine (Cisco Systems)
Peter Ecclesine (Cisco Systems)

6. Round table status report
Nov 2009
Round table status report
TGn – Standards Board approved. In publication editing phase
TGw – same
REVmb – in LB149 resolution
Peter Ecclesine (Cisco Systems)

7. Nov 2009
July 2007
Nov 2009
Reflector Updates
Each editor is expected to be on the reflector and current.
If you didn’t receive the meeting notice from the reflector, please send to
To be updated:
None
Peter Ecclesine (Cisco Systems)
Peter Ecclesine (Cisco Systems)

8. IEEE Publication Status
Nov 2009
July 2007
Nov 2009
IEEE Publication Status
IEEE published and for free download with Get802
Published in June 2007
Combines all existing amendments and includes maintenance work by TGma
Publications completed for k, r and y,
11k now available with Get802
11r now available with Get802
11y now available with Get802
Peter Ecclesine (Cisco Systems)
Peter Ecclesine (Cisco Systems)

9. Nov 2009
Nov 2009
MEC Status
P802.11p D7.0 has gone through Mandatory Editorial Coordination in June 2009
See p-P802-11p D7 Mandatory Editorial Coordination MEC.doc
P802.11u D6.0 has gone through Mandatory Editorial Coordination in July 2009
See u-P802-11u D7 Mandatory Editorial Coordination MEC.doc
P802.11v D6.0 has gone through Mandatory Editorial Coordination in July 2009
See u-P802-11v D6 Mandatory Editorial Coordination MEC.doc
P802.11z D5.0 has gone through Mandatory Editorial Coordination in July 2009
See u-P802-11z D5 Mandatory Editorial Coordination MEC.doc
Peter Ecclesine (Cisco Systems)

10. Numbering Alignment Process
Nov 2009
Nov 2009
Numbering Alignment Process
Wait till TGw, TGn published. Update from published standards.
TGp will start a new update cycle once TGw, TGn updates completed.
Slide 10
Peter Ecclesine (Cisco Systems)

11. Amendment & other ordering notes
Nov 2009
Nov 2009
Amendment & other ordering notes
Editors define publication order independent of working group public timelines:
Since official timeline is volatile and moves around
Publication order helps provide stability in amendment numbering, figures, clauses and other numbering assignments
Editors are committed to maintain a rational publication order
Numbering spreadsheet 08/0644:
Succeeding amendments to do their respective updates
Must match the official timeline after plenaries
Peter Ecclesine (Cisco Systems)

12. Nov 2009
July 2007
Nov 2009
ANA Announcements
Current ANA announced to group is r8. (8/6/2009)
See
All new requests received by end of meeting will be uploaded and announced via WG reflector
Procedure for ANA is contained in 07/0827r0.
See
Editorial Guidance
ANA assignments should be done before the time of moving from WG LB to Sponsor ballot.
If a resource number is not in the ANA Database, please use <ANA> in drafts!
Editors to replace any ANA controlled resources numbers with <ANA> upon incorporation of material into drafts.
Peter Ecclesine (Cisco Systems)
Peter Ecclesine (Cisco Systems)

13. Amendment Ordering Nov 2009 Amendment Number Task Group REVCOM Date
July 2007
Nov 2009
Nov 2009
Amendment numbering is editorial! No need to make ballot comments on these dynamic numbers!
Amendment Ordering
Data as of Nov 2009
See
Amendment Number
Task Group
REVCOM Date
Amendment 4
TGw
Sept Completed
Amendment 5
TGn
Amendment 6
TGz
Jan 2010
Amendment 7
TGp
Nov 2010 – was June 2010
Amendment 8
TGv
June 2010
Amendment 9
TGu
Sept 2010
Amendment 10
TGs
Jan 2011 – was Sept 2010
Revision
802.11mb
June 2011
Amendment 1
TGaa
Oct 2011 – was June 2011
Amendment 2
TGac
Dec 2012
Amendment 3
TGad
Peter Ecclesine (Cisco Systems)
Peter Ecclesine (Cisco Systems)

14. Email Your Draft Status Updates
Nov 2009
September 2007
Nov 2009
Your Draft Status Updates
Each editor, please send update for next page via the editor’s reflector no later than Thursday am2 to update table on next page!
Peter Ecclesine (Cisco Systems)
Peter Ecclesine (Cisco Systems)

15. Draft Development Snapshot
July 2009
July 2007
Nov 2009
Nov 2009
Draft Development Snapshot
Most current doc shaded green.
Changes from last report shown in red. TG
Published or Draft Baseline Documents
Source
MEC
Style Guide
Editor
Snapshot Date
802.11 k r y w n z p v u s mb aa
2007
2008
10.0
11.0
6.0
Word
Yes
Menzo Wentink
17-July
5.0
9.0
Frame 7.2
2009
Wayne Fisher
2-Nov
7.02
7.0 No
Emily Qi
Nov
8.0
Necati Canpolat
3-Nov
4.0
6.01
5.01
3.03
Frame 8.0
Kazuyuki Sakoda , pro-tem
16-July
2007 Inc
2008 Inc -
1.03
Adrian Stephens
12-May
0.01
Hang Lui
Slide 15
Peter Ecclesine (Cisco Systems)
Page 15
Peter Ecclesine (Cisco Systems)

16. Lessons Learned from RevCom
Nov 2009
Lessons Learned from RevCom
During Sponsor ballot…
Minimise cross references (“disagree – see CID 1234”)
Because not all CIDs are included in the “unsatisfied comments” listing, so this may end up a dangling reference.
Copy resolution + add (“same as resoution for CID 1234”)
Provide full URLs for doc references
Because some members of RevCom and the Sponsor Pool may not be familiar with how to get to Mentor
Minimise use of doc references
Cut and paste from reference doc, where-ever possible. This minimises work for sponsor ballot members getting reference documents.
Easier to audit process
Peter Ecclesine (Cisco Systems)

17. Lessons learned from TGn editing
Nov 2009
Lessons learned from TGn editing
Publication editor will ensure consistency with baseline
Don’t make systematic stylistic changes that make it inconsistent with baseline
e.g., “set to Public” changed to “set to 0 (representing public)” by publication editor
Don’t spend a lot of committee time wordsmithing text
Peter Ecclesine (Cisco Systems)

18. 802.11 Style Guide See 11-09-1034-00-0000-wg11-style-guide.doc
Nov 2009
Style Guide
See wg11-style-guide.doc
Peter Ecclesine (Cisco Systems)

19. Conference Calls Are they of any value? Next Meeting: January 17-22
Nov 2009
Conference Calls
Are they of any value?
Next Meeting: January 17-22
Any need for conference calls?
Peter Ecclesine (Cisco Systems)

20. Nov 2009
Nov 2009
Reference Material
Peter Ecclesine (Cisco Systems)

21. Editorial Streamlining
Nov 2009
July 2007
Nov 2009
Editorial Streamlining
Focus is on consistency across all TGs:
Completed
Streamlined ANA processes – 07/0827r0
Consistent format for REDLINE contributions across TGs – 07/0788r0
Consistent process for editorial comment resolution across TGs (WG & Sponsor) – 07/2050r0
Guideline for technical vs. editorial, sample editorial comment responses
Format for comment reporting across TGs (WG & Sponsor) – 07/1990r0 (tool in 07/2116r0)
Stable numbering method (See 07/2810r0)
Consistent naming of redlines (See 07/2810r0)
Draft templates for FRAME (no Word) to help train new editors more rapidly
Under Construction (in priority order)
Revise the editor’s guideline – comments on 09/1034?
Mentoring program – Name a mentor for each new editor
Request in future Plenary sessions Mondays 7:30pm Frame surgery
MIB element numbering and compiling – publish a rolled-up MIB of k/r/y
Guideline on non-technical front matter
Guideline describing expected editorial development and maturity of draft through stages in for consistency across TGs
Guidelines for primitives – ARC to consider
Peter Ecclesine (Cisco Systems)
Peter Ecclesine (Cisco Systems)

22. Numbering of Annexes and Clauses
Nov 2009
July 2007
Nov 2009
Numbering of Annexes and Clauses
Proposal: TGMb will fix the ordering of annexes
Ample bad precedent set by 11k
Bibliography should be the final annex per IEEE Standards Style Guide
Clause numbering has similar issue during rollup
TGn clause 3a, 11r clause 11a, 11y clause 11.9a
REVmb numbering will stay using “Amendment style” numbering until the very last possible moment before going to Sponsor Ballot.
Peter Ecclesine (Cisco Systems)
Peter Ecclesine (Cisco Systems)

23. Draft naming convention
Nov 2009
Nov 2009
Draft naming convention
Drafts and redlines are .pdf files
Syntax:
Draft <project>_<draft> [Redline [Compared to <project>_<draft>]].pdf
Examples:
Draft P802.11n_D8.0.pdf
Draft P802.11n_D8.0 Redline.pdf
Draft P802.11n_D7.04 Redline Compared to P802.11n_D7.03.pdf
Please use this convention for all drafts posted on the website.
Peter Ecclesine (Cisco Systems)

24. Nov 2009
July 2007
Nov 2009
Publication Work Plan Note: to be included in the editor’s operations manual
Here is the workflow we have used for a number of years with IEEE staff on publication of publications: 
Editors provide FRAME source and any freestanding graphics (Powerpoint, Visio. TIF) to staff at time of REVCOM submission.
Editors provide a list of requests editorial corrections no later than REVCOM approval date.
Staff prepares a publication draft and highlights changes they have made and questions they need addressed or confirmed. This draft is sent to Task Group Editor and the Working Group Technical Editor (me). This typically occurs about 2-3 weeks after approval for publication, since the preparation work is usually (but not always) begun ahead of approval. This is also typically the draft peer reviewed by IEEE staff.
The Task Group Editor responds to all questions on domain specific questions, with copy to Working Group editor (me). This typically takes about 3-5 days.
The Working Group Technical Editor reviews responses from the Task Group editor, completes any responses, and provides a list of WG officers and voting members valid for the document as of the opening day of the Sponsor ballot. This typically only takes one additional day from the prior step as most of the work is done in parallel by the two editors.
Final draft is submitted by the IEEE staff to Working Group Technical Editor and Task Group Editor for sign-off. Any changes from the responses or IEEE peer review are highlighted and explained. This typically takes only one or two days more after the responses are received from the editors.
Task Group Editor gives final approval. No changes are expected. This usually occurs within 24 hours.
Working Group Technical Editor signs off and provides draft to Working Group Chair. No changes are expected. This usually occurs within 24 hours and in parallel with the previous step.
Working Group Chair sends to sponsor and IEEE staff letting them know the Working Group has signed off on the publication process.
Peter Ecclesine (Cisco Systems)
Peter Ecclesine (Cisco Systems)

25. Terry Cole on Changes to MIB elements
Nov 2009
Nov 2009
Terry Cole on Changes to MIB elements
You can incrementally add to a MIB element without deprecation at any level. That is, add new values and meaning pairs.
You can change the description of a MIB element without deprecation at any level. That is add new text clarifying or even changing the meaning of the element to keep up with the standard.
I would advise deprecation when changing the definition of some value of a MIB from one thing to another. However, I don't know of any rules requiring this.
Peter Ecclesine (Cisco Systems)

26. Publications: lessons learned
Nov 2009
Nov 2009
Publications: lessons learned
When quoting baseline text inaccurately, the baseline text is changed whether or not the changes were marked. The IEEE staff will actually do the appropriate changes as if the task group had actually intended to change the baseline.
Drafts can minimally quote baseline text to minimize such changes
Should revisit the decision to include full context during insertion
Full Annex titles have to be shown in the amendment; more importantly included “normative” vs. “informative”
TGk inadvertently changed Annex A to be fully informative
TGr battled to fix Annex A but caused ripples
TGy r1 has brief review of significant things changed for publication
In editor’s operations manual and during balloting, should comment that Annexes should be fully titled with good reason to vote “No” in balloting
Slide 26
Peter Ecclesine (Cisco Systems)

27. Publications: lessons learned (cont’d)
Nov 2009
Nov 2009
Publications: lessons learned (cont’d)
Acronym rules are inconsistent
Styleguide doesn’t include definitions
Every document is treated as standalone, thus first acronym reference must be spelled out. Even though, other amendments or baseline may have defined and used the acronym earlier.
Goal should be to have as few changes between the final balloted amendment and final published amendment.
How do we deal with subjective decisions made by the IEEE copy editors as their styles vary?
Booleans should be capitalized: TRUE and FALSE
when “set to”
Booleans should be lower case: is true and is false (raise the issue with Style Guide update)
Slide 27
Peter Ecclesine (Cisco Systems)