Re: [P1800] Dealing with "Editorial changes"

Thanks Stu,

Your description is consistent with my understanding.

Neil



On 10/27/08 16:21, Stuart Sutherland wrote:
> Yes, it my understanding that the changes to the next draft are limited to: 
> 
> a) Corrections to how the editor (me) implemented change instructions in
> drafts 7 and 7a (this does NOT include corrections to the change
> instructions; it only covers corrections to how I implemented the
> instructions).
> 
> b) Corrections to spelling, punctuation, fonts, and cross references.
> 
> c) Any changes the IEEE requests as part of their review of draft 7a in
> preparation for balloting.
> 
> I am under the impression that any errors that are found in either the LRM
> or any of the change instructions should now be filed as new mantis items.
> If an error is critical, those that vote on the standard can note that the
> error needs to be corrected as part of their ballot.
> 
> 
> Stu
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> Stuart Sutherland
> stuart@sutherland-hdl.com
> +1-503-692-0898
> www.sutherland-hdl.com
> 
> 
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: owner-ieee1800@eda.org [mailto:owner-ieee1800@eda.org] On Behalf
>> Of Neil Korpusik
>> Sent: Monday, October 27, 2008 1:57 PM
>> To: Stuart Sutherland
>> Cc: IEEE P1800 Working Group
>> Subject: [P1800] Dealing with "Editorial changes"
>>
>> Hi Stu,
>>
>> Given the discussion that we had at the P1800 Working Group meeting
>> last
>> Thursday, I would like to request that you be very conservative in what
>> changes you make to the LRM with regards to "Editorial changes".
>>
>> I am seeing requests coming in from the Technical Committees that are
>> definitely beyond being purely Editorial. Since we have limited the
>> committees to only making Editorial changes, there seems to be a
>> tendency
>> to try to call everything Editorial.
>>
>> Now that I am sending emails out saying that I think some of the
>> requested
>> changes are beyond being Editorial, I would not be surprised to see
>> requests start going directly to you.
>>
>> We could be at risk of things getting out of control if you allow too
>> many
>> changes to pass through.
>>
>> Neil
>>
>> --
>> This message has been scanned for viruses and
>> dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
>> believed to be clean.
> 
> 

-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.