May I suggest a couple rules I'd personally use for what should be included in your draft…
We have spent a lot of bits discussing how IEEE references standards. IEEE does not assume it can mandate to another SDO how that other SDO should do its references. 1. Be consistent with IETF conventions for referencing standards. IEEE includes at the beginning of its reference section an explanation that an undated reference indicates the latest version of the standard. That is IEEE’s convention. That does not necessarily mean that any other standards organization has to use that convention in referencing IEEE standards. This is part of the IEEE-SA Style Manual, not a rule of IEEE-SA. (That is why that explanation in the document rather than expecting users of the document to know this (e.g., have read the IEEE-SA Style Manual). And, that is why I previously suggested some kind of footnote that is helpful to the user of your standard.) 2. Be friendly to the users of your standard. IEEE rules also define an amendment or corrigendum as being part of the base standard when approved. There is logic behind this, more often than not, an amendment will not provide sufficient information for a complete implementation — an implementer typically will need the base document and perhaps other amendments to properly implement a device that includes the functionality added by an amendment. Mr. Kinney will probably correct me if I’m wrong, but I doubt you can implement a 15.4e device without specification contained in both the base standard. A lot of participants in IEEE standards development don’t really understand this, let alone users of the standard that don’t participate in standards development. This policy isn’t reiterated in IEEE standards so often users of the standard will miss this (e.g., question like I can’t find x in IEEE Std …). How many of the users of your standard will understand this? If IEEE Std 15.4e is critical help the reader understand that. 1. Be consistent with IETF conventions for referencing standards. (Write your references as is done for IETF.) 2. Be friendly to the users of your standard. (Use what editorial tools, e.g., footnotes, other kind of notes, etc., to help your readers understand what is important for them to understand.) —Bob On Apr 30, 2015, at 9:55 AM, Pat Kinney <[email protected]> wrote: > An amendment references (is based upon) the latest revision when it was > approved, hence 802.15.4e is based upon (i.e. it references) 802.15.4-2011. > > Pat > Pat Kinney > Kinney Consulting LLC > IEEE 802.15 WG vice chair, TG chair > ISA100.11a WG chair > O: +1.847.960.3715 > [email protected] > > > > > > > On 30, Apr2015, at 10:37, Pascal Thubert (pthubert) <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Hello Michael > > For All I know 4e TSCH is only defined on 2011. There are known similar > technologies running over 2006 but they are not 4e... > > The undated reference in an RFC to an IEEE spec applies to the present state > at the date of the RFC and to all future versions unless the RFC is revised. > > This proved useful for Ethernet; too much maybe since we were fooled into > extending IP over Ethernet to Wi-Fi... > > Cheers, > > Pascal > >> Le 30 avr. 2015 à 07:50, Michael Richardson <[email protected]> a écrit : >> >> >> Pascal Thubert (pthubert) <[email protected]> wrote: >>> Today, undated and without the 'e', IEEE802.15.4 means 2011 plus all >>> the amendments. >> >> Given that we can't run on 802.15.4-2011, this is why I'm concerned about >> referencing "802.15.4". >> >>> So, a reference to IEEE Std 802.3 (without year) today is identical to the >>> 2012 dated reference, but when the current revision is approved (expected >>> this year), a reference to the 2012 revision would not include the >>> maintenance changes included in the current revision, nor any of the >>> amendments likely to be approved soon after the revision is approved. >> >> How does an outsider know when the reference was made? Is it by the date >> of the document making the reference? >> >> If the IETF writes a document in 2014, but it doesn't get published in Jan. >> 2015, >> what IEEE document would "802.15.4" reference? >> >> Robert suggests text like: >> >>> In development of this RFC, IEEE Std 802.99 documents considered included >>> IEEE Std 802.99-2016 and P802.99/D8. >> >> and so if we can do this, then I'm happy. >> >> >> >> >> -- >> Michael Richardson <[email protected]>, Sandelman Software Works >> -= IPv6 IoT consulting =- >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 6tisch mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6tisch > > _______________________________________________ > 6tisch mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6tisch > > _______________________________________________ 6tisch mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6tisch
