SV-AC_Minutes_2016_05_04 < P1800

P1800 Web>SystemVerilogAssertionCommittee>SVACMeetingMinutes>SV-AC_Minutes_2016_05_04 (2016-05-05, ErikSeligman) (raw view)EditAttach
Minutes from SV-AC Committee Meeting

Date:    2016-05-04

Time:    16.00:00 UTC (9:00 PDT)

Duration: 1 hour

*Agenda*
   * Reminder of IEEE patent policy<br /> See: http://standards.ieee.org/board/pat/pat-slideset.ppt
   * Minutes approval
   * Email ballot results
   * Mantis items in progress
   * Opens

*Attendance Record*

<u>Legend:</u>

x = attended

- = missed

r = represented

. = not yet a member

v = valid voter (2 out of last 3 or 3/4 overall)

n = not a valid voter

t = chair eligible to vote only to make or break a tie

Attendance re-initialized on 2016-03-09:

v[.x-xx] Mehbub Ali (Intel)

n[.xx--] Ang Boon Chong (Intel)

n[x-x-x] Shalom Bresticker (Accellera)

n[.x---] Dennis Brophy (Mentor Graphics)

v[xxxxx] Eduard Cerny (Synopsys)

v[xx-xx] Ben Cohen (Accellera)

t[x-xxx] Dmitry Korchemny (Synopsys - Chair)

v[xxx-x] Manisha Kulshrestha (Mentor Graphics)

v[xxxxx] Anupam Prabhakar (Mentor Graphics)

v[xxxxx] Erik Seligman (Intel – Co-chair)

n[x-x-x] Samik Sengupta (Synopsys)

   |- attendance on 2016-05-04

|--- voting eligibility on 2016-05-04

*Minutes*

<u>IEEE patent policy reminder</u>

<u>Minutes approval</u>

Ben: mention about closing 2578 and 5584 is missing from the minutes

<u>Email ballot results</u>

Issue 3672 passed, but there were comments from Shalom who was not a valid voter. It was decided to address his comments and revote.

Ed asked from everybody to look closely at his proposal to avoid redundant ballots.

<u>Mantis 3117: make it clear that rewriting algorithm (F.4.1) applies to checker and let</u>

Manisha: The proposal is ready to vote. Writing a separate proposal on let.

<u>Opens </u>

Dmitry: Created Mantis 5623 requesting clarification of non-degeneracy.

Manisha: Current formulation is confusing: there is an impression that only sequences admitting only empty matches are allowed in the antecedent of a non-overlapping implication.

Dmitry: What about: “It is legal for this sequence to admit only empty matches”?

Shalom:

Submitted items 4022 and 3555. They are ready to vote.

Ben:

Suggest to close 2578 and 5548

Dmitry: Suggest the following reason for closing 2578: “The existing definition of vacuity is satisfactory for practical applications”. I am opposed to close 5548 because it is about adding a reference to non-degeneracy from implication property description.

Samik: Will create a Mantis to improve the language 17.5 Checker procedures. It will be possible to call to vote when ready since this is an editorial change.

-- %USERSIG{ErikSeligman - 2016-05-05}%

---++ Comments

%COMMENT%
Topic revision: r1 - 2016-05-05 - 21:40:43 - ErikSeligman
P1800