Re: Improtant! IEEE 1364-2001 reprint (fwd)

From: Shalom.Bresticker@motorola.com
Date: Sat Apr 12 2003 - 13:45:59 PDT

  • Next message: Shalom.Bresticker@motorola.com: "Improtant! IEEE 1364-2001 reprint (fwd)"

    Precedence: bulk

    Resend. 

    -- 
Shalom Bresticker                           Shalom.Bresticker@motorola.com
Design & Reuse Methodology                             Tel: +972 9 9522268
Motorola Semiconductor Israel, Ltd.                    Fax: +972 9 9522890
POB 2208, Herzlia 46120, ISRAEL                       Cell: +972 50 441478

    ---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Sat, 12 Apr 2003 23:43:10 +0300 (IDT)
From: Shalom.Bresticker@motorola.com
To: Michael McNamara <mac@verisity.com>
Cc: 1364@eda.org, etf@boyd.com, ptf@eda.org, btf@eda.org,
     Paul J. Menchini <mench@mench.com>
Subject: Re: Improtant! IEEE 1364-2001 reprint

    Ummm, first tell me, are all these email addresses really valid?
(ptf@eda.org, for example) I suspect your email may not have reached all the
intended audience. Same for the previous email.

    Anyway, the matter is not simple.

    Draft 6 has a number of errors which were found after submission to IEEE
and were fixed in 2001B, as well as most of the problems introduced by IEEE in
2001a. Draft 6 also contains additional errors which were identified by 1364
after submission of the change requests from 2001a to 2001b. Many of these are
non-substantive and should be approvable without reballoting.

    (By non-substantive, I mean not just typos but also things like wrong
cross-references, incorrect code examples, etc.)

    2001b is therefore in a better state overall than Draft 6, but not all the
formatting problems were fixed, and it still contains errors which were
identified afterwards. 2001b also contains some cases where the correction from
2001a was done incorrectly by IEEE.

    The best option would be to take 2001b and fix the non-substantive errors which
were found afterwards as well as fix the previous errors correctly. Also, there
are a few things we want to do to improve the formatting.

    We could do that by selecting a subset of the already vsg-passed issues, plus,
as Stefen Boyd suggested, giving a fast approval track to those other items we
would want to introduce to the new version.

    The question is, what is the schedule for all this.

    In any case, the PDF should be generated by 1364 and submitted to IEEE for
approval, instead of having them generate the PDF themselves.

    One last point: 2001a contains one major substantive change from Draft 6, which
is the change in input and output declarations in tasks and functions from
"input_declaration" to "tf_input_declaration", etc. (or something like that).

    Shalom

    -- 
Shalom Bresticker                           Shalom.Bresticker@motorola.com
Design & Reuse Methodology                             Tel: +972 9 9522268
Motorola Semiconductor Israel, Ltd.                    Fax: +972 9 9522890
POB 2208, Herzlia 46120, ISRAEL                       Cell: +972 50 441478

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 12 2003 - 13:47:14 PDT and
    sponsored by Boyd Technology, Inc.