1. 802-11 WG Technical Editor’s Report
March 2004
doc.: IEEE /005r3
March 2004
WG Technical Editor’s Report
March 2004 Plenary Meeting
Terry Cole, AMD
Closing Report
(WG technical editor status will be reported all
this year with revisions of this same document number)
IEEE /005r3
Terry Cole, AMD
Terry Cole, AMD

2. Internationalization
March 2004
Internationalization
ISO drafts
ISO version of (2003 edition)
2003 Reaff roll-up has been submitted for ISO approval.
Terry Cole and Stuart Kerry are project leaders.
“The consolidated document is now circulated for Draft International Standard due to complete early May I expect there to be minimal (even no) comments and it will therefore become a full IS immediately following the ballot close.”
802.11g and h PARS both request internationalization and WGTE is ready to start ISO projects.
Terry Cole, AMD

3. March 2004
doc.: IEEE /005r3
March 2003
Motions
Move to submit g-2003 and h-2003 to ISO/IEC for Fast Track approval through the UK national body. Robin Tasker has volunteered to make the submission, and Terry Cole will be the project editor : Cole/______ ___ ___:___:___
802: information item (II) only Follows 802 historical procedures.
Terry Cole, AMD
Terry Cole, AMD

4. Work of 802.11 Editors Part of continuous improvement in 802.11
March 2004
Work of Editors
Part of continuous improvement in
Input and serious questions from members this week:
“Role of task group editor inadequate in rules”
“How should I best start this amendment?”
“What are the editor’s role in proposing text?”
“What is the editor’s role during comment resolution?”
“Who’s right in the event of an error?”
I suggest
P&P updates to list editorial responsibilities and duties
An Editor’s Guide
Terry Cole, AMD

5. Proposed P&P Update Problem Goals
March 2004
Proposed P&P Update
Problem
Task Group editor responsibilities not well defined in P&P
Goals
More clearly define responsibilities of task group editor
More clearly define duties of task group and editor in critical well established area in
Interim draft preparation
Draft adoption
Ballot draft preparation
Editorial comment processing
Establish more commonality in the editorial process across all task groups
Facilitate more efficient WG and member time when dealing with drafts
Proposed insertion of several important areas that combine to make the editorial process work in
Editorial changes will be needed to align existing P&P text with the following proposed material to be inserted into the P&P
Terry Cole, AMD

6. Proposed P&P Update Responsibilities of Task Group Editor
March 2004
Proposed P&P Update
Responsibilities of Task Group Editor
Produce interim draft texts, ballot texts, and final text for REVCOM submission
Oversee the creation of ballot comment responses in the editorial classification for review and adoption by task group
Provide fair and equitable access to drafts by all working group members
Communicate openly about problems in the draft by asking the task group to seek solutions
Maintain a good knowledge of IEEE style guide, WG draft guide, tool proficiency, and a good technical understanding of the draft subject matter
Correct mistakes in a timely and open manner in accordance with meeting minutes
Maintain the trust (based on at least openness, skill, impartiality) and good working relationship with all members of the task group
Work with the task group chair during the REVCOM standards approval process
Work with the working group technical editor and IEEE staff to during the standard publication process
Terry Cole, AMD

7. P&P Proposed Update Duties of the editor during the session
March 2004
P&P Proposed Update
Duties of the editor during the session
Produce at least one new draft for use by all working group members
Request adoption of at least one draft (or section) per session by the task group, including a review of any highlighted items or editor notes needing clarification
Accept assignment to produce any necessary ballot drafts on a schedule that can be met
Work with task group to openly clarify any items thought to be potentially in error in the draft, aligning with the minutes in all cases
Changes are inevitable (even flip-flopping). Understand as the WG makes changes (by motion) in the science and make the most of all opportunities to clarify and modify text
Terry Cole, AMD

8. March 2004
Proposed P&P Updates
Duties of the task group with respect to the editorial process during the session
Appoint a secretary who will produce minutes per the secretary’s guide, providing a record of all motions for the editor to implement.
Review the draft at least once at each session, focusing on editor notes, red-line text, and highlighted text.
Adopt by motion a draft (or section) at least once per session, ensuring the editor can remove highlighted and red-line material.
Provide editor with clear motions describing technical content of draft
Review and adopt by motion all editor proposed comment ballot resolutions
Establish ballot schedules and make supporting motions that are in-line with milestones the editor says can be met given the ballot text guide below
Provide clear direction to editor concerning the contents of each required ballot text so that it will not contain missing material, edit notes, etc.
Bring potential errors to the attention of the editor in a timely and professional manner. Errors happen and understand that errors are to be corrected in accordance with meeting minutes.
Terry Cole, AMD

9. March 2004
Proposed P&P Updates
Duties of the Task Group with respect to the editorial process between sessions
Read the posted drafts, focusing on red-lines, editor notes, and highlighted items.
Vote on ballots, making editorial comments very specific and proposing a solution.
Bring potential errors to the attention of the editor in a professional way, checking the meeting minutes.
Terry Cole, AMD

10. Proposed P&P Updates Duties of the editor for ballot text preparation
March 2004
Proposed P&P Updates
Duties of the editor for ballot text preparation
Produce ballot text on the schedule agreed with task group
Communicate openly to task group the problems that make a draft not suitable for ballot
Communicate openly to the task group any motions not implemented in ballot text, any editor notes included in ballot text, etc. since it would be unsuitable for ballot
Provide a red-line version from previous ballot text
Duties of the editor during editorial comment processing
Process all comments classified as editorial, describing clearly the proposed resolution
Request adoption by the task group of all comment resolution descriptions
Request reclassification or clarification of any comments that are clearly or marginally not editorial
Terry Cole, AMD

11. Proposed P&P Updates Requires of ballot text produced by editor
March 2004
Proposed P&P Updates
Requires of ballot text produced by editor
Must conform to IEEE style guide
Must be labeled properly with project number, draft status and revision number
Must implement all draft related motions from task group minutes
Must not contain editor notes indicating work is incomplete, with the exception of a “blank” as defined and used by Robert’s Rules for the purpose of collecting input about a specific enumerable or quantifiable parameters.
Must be available as clean text and as red-line from previous ballot
Requirements of interim draft text produced by editor
Must always contain an editor’s note indicating the status of implementation of motions, referenced to a minutes document or day of session, noting any exceptions clearly.
Must always contain a note indicating what revision marks are referenced to, and if revision marks are adopted or not adopted by the task group.
Must always contain colored highlighted on any text that is provided by the editor but not in accordance with existing motions.
Terry Cole, AMD

12. Motions For purpose of discussion:
March 2004
doc.: IEEE /005r3
March 2003
Motions
For purpose of discussion:
“To adopt the material in this document for P&P updates concerning the editorial process within , inserting these bullets into appropriate existing and new sections, removing conflicting material from existing sections.”
Terry Cole, AMD
Terry Cole, AMD

13. Proposed Editor’s Guide
March 2004
Proposed Editor’s Guide
Goals
Education and development of editors
Describe best practices for defined duties of editor in critical well established area in
Interim draft preparation
Draft adoption
Ballot draft preparation
Editorial comment processing
Describe best practices for the process of creation of new text
Describe best practice tools and work practices for using those tools
Describe other good practices for specific situations
Create commonality in the working group member’s experience of reading and examining all drafts
Proposed Editor’s Guide would not be in P&P but would be a separately maintained document
Working Group Technical Editor would be responsible to maintain this document with the help and consultation of editors, chairs, and members.
Terry Cole, AMD

14. Best Practices For interim drafts:
March 2004
Best Practices
For interim drafts:
Produce an incoming draft for each session (posted early) that shows all changes made with redlines from the last adoption by the task group.
Make use of editing notes to ask questions of the group, to describe problems, to show missing items, to explain unobvious changes, and to propose solutions to problems found.
Always highlight with yellow any text that is not in accordance with meeting minutes that you have provided as solution to problems or missing text. Only remove the highlighting when the group makes a motion to adopt the highlighted text.
When a draft (or section) is adopted by the task group, remove or reset revision marks.
Make an editor note per motion that remains to be implemented. Remove it when you implement the motion.
Make an editor note per difficulty you find. If possible, propose solution(s) in a fair and impartial manner using editors notes, yellow highlighting, or contributions.
Produce an outgoing draft as near to the conclusion of the task group work as feasible that is complete – complete in the sense that all motions are either implemented or noted as needing to be implemented, all editor remarks are up to date, and you have reviewed the draft as well as can be anticipated for an outgoing draft.
If a potential technical error or labeling in the outgoing draft is raised by public or private communication, post a correction, (correction might be only the addition of an editor note).
Prepare an incoming draft and post as early as feasible.
Maintain fair access to drafts by the entire working group.
Terry Cole, AMD

15. Best Practices For ballot drafts:
March 2004
Best Practices
For ballot drafts:
When schedule allows or necessitates, make use of the ability for the working group to authorize a delayed ballot, giving you time following a session to produce and check the text implementing all adopted motions.
Double check all draft ballot labeling
Double check editing instructions (insert, delete, change – show underline and strike-through to base)
Always provide a red-line version to the previously balloted text, if any.
Terry Cole, AMD

16. Other Good Practices Related to process
March 2004
Other Good Practices
Related to process
Outline your draft and get the group to discuss it and adopt it before ever starting!
Do not rush to text… experience shows this not very effective.
Divide and conquer… work on a sub-section of the document and get that right before going on to other sections
Use hierarchy, abstraction, interfaces, and layering to your advantage
Experience shows that drafts are often significantly rewritten during sponsor ballot. Rewrite during the comment ballot process is painful. After you’ve got the science stable, rewrite it before ballot. It’s much more efficient outside the comment resolution process than inside it.
Terry Cole, AMD

17. Other Good Practices Long-haul Efficiency Tricks
March 2004
Other Good Practices
Long-haul Efficiency Tricks
Leave all informative introductions and summaries to last. Put in an editor note intending what feature you plan to introduce or summarize and then do it when the science is stable.
Avoid duplicating information until the last. Duplicated information is hard to maintain but often easy to understand. But conflicting information causes huge delays. Put in a note indicating what information you plan to repeat for clarity and fill it in when the science is stable.
Put in an editor’s note in the main text for each PICS you will need to later create.
Put in an editor’s note in the main text for each MIB entry you need to later create… even define in there and move it later.
Terry Cole, AMD

18. Other Good Practices Editing Editors Helpers
March 2004
Other Good Practices
Editing
Organize and reorganize as sections become more complex or more simple. Make the draft easy to understand!
Use one word for one thing… consistently.
Define acronyms and then use them… consistently. If it doesn’t make things clearer… don’t define them.
Provide someone who wants to thoroughly rework a section with ASCII plain text. Let them focus on the words. They can give you back text and you can merge it easily, without risking damage to your larger file through the many risks that exist from sharing source and trying to get things back together later.
Editors Helpers
Provide the editor with a very small review team for all ballot drafts… there is nothing like a second or third set of eyes to catch errors.
Limit any review copies provided to assistants to a 3 day period, maximum, before posting to everyone.
Don’t have too many helpers… it won’t help.
Terry Cole, AMD