RE: [sv-ac] Editorial change on "resp."

Hi Neil,

Removing resp. seems reasonable to me. Just need to add a margin mark with this change.

Thanks,
Dmitry

-----Original Message-----
From: Neil Korpusik [mailto:neil.korpusik@oracle.com]
Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2011 02:13
To: Korchemny, Dmitry; Stuart Sutherland
Cc: sv-ac@eda-stds.org
Subject: Re: [sv-ac] Editorial change on "resp."

Hi Stu,

I have read that one sentence about 5 times now...

I agree with Shalom's rewording, however I agree with you that his rewording goes beyond what we can consider to be an Editorial change.

I don't see how changing "resp." to "respectively" will help anyone better understand the actual meaning of this sentence. My recommendation is to either leave this sentence as is, or remove "resp." from the parenthetical comments. That would leave us with the following sentence. This is of a form that more people are used to seeing.

    "The following functions allow to access the sampled value of an expression
     at the immediate past and future ticks of the global clock and to detect
     changes in the sampled value from the past (current) tick of the
     global clock to its current (next) tick."

We should let Dmitry decide if removing "resp." is something that he is willing to allow.

Neil

On 08/10/11 04:27, Korchemny, Dmitry wrote:
> Hi Stu,
>
> The correct interpretation is "respectively". This is the only interpretation that makes sense in this context. I think it can safely done during the editing, and does not require SV-AC approval if Neil agrees.
>
> Thanks,
> Dmitry
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-sv-ac@eda.org [mailto:owner-sv-ac@eda.org] On Behalf Of
> Stuart Sutherland
> Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2011 01:48
> To: neil.korpusik@oracle.com; sv-ac@eda-stds.org
> Subject: RE: [sv-ac] Editorial change on "resp."
>
> I, too, like Shalom's rewording. However, I don't think that much rewording is a simple editorial correction, like just expanding out the abbreviation of "resp." would be. I could either change "resp." to "with respect to the"
> as an editorial correction, or a Mantis could be filed and approved for the more clear rewording.
>
> I would prefer to leave it up to Dmitry and Neil as to how much of a change I can make as an editor without going through the full committee/champions/working group approval process.
>
> Stu
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> Stuart Sutherland
> Sutherland HDL, Inc.
> stuart@sutherland-hdl.com
> 503-692-0898
> www.sutherland-hdl.com
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-sv-ac@eda.org [mailto:owner-sv-ac@eda.org] On Behalf Of
> Thomas J Thatcher
> Sent: Tuesday, August 09, 2011 12:34 PM
> To: Bresticker, Shalom
> Cc: neil.korpusik@oracle.com; Stuart Sutherland; sv-ac@eda-stds.org
> Subject: Re: [sv-ac] Editorial change on "resp."
>
> Hi Stu,
>
> I agree with Shalom's interpretation. I think the sentence should be re-worded the way he stated it:
>
> "...to detect changes in the sampled value from the *past* tick of the global clock to its *current* tick, and from the *current* tick of the global clock to its *next* tick,"
>
> resp.
>
> Tom
>
>
>
> On 08/09/11 11:12, Bresticker, Shalom wrote:
>> I think it meant 'respectively', but was not used precisely:
>>
>> "...to detect changes in the sampled value from the past (resp.
>> current)
> tick of the global clock to its current (resp. next) tick."
>> The words outside the parentheses were to go together and the words
>> inside
> the parentheses were to go together.
>> I.e., it should be read as though it said this,
>>
>> "...to detect changes in the sampled value from the *past* tick of
>> the
> global clock to its *current* tick, and from the *current* tick of the global clock to its *next* tick,"
>> just as "respectively" is used with a list to avoid having to repeat
>> the words for each member of the list, as the example, "they received
>> sentences of one year and eight months, respectively," is short for
>> "He1 received a sentence of one year and he2 received a sentence of
>> eight
> months."
>> Regards respectively,
>> Shalom
>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Neil Korpusik [mailto:neil.korpusik@oracle.com]
>>> Sent: Tuesday, August 09, 2011 8:47 PM
>>> To: Stuart Sutherland
>>> Cc: Bresticker, Shalom; sv-ac@eda-stds.org
>>> Subject: Re: [sv-ac] Editorial change on "resp."
>>>
>>> Hi Stu,
>>>
>>> I assume the intent was "with respect to the".
>>>
>>>
>>> Neil
>>>
>>>
>>> On 08/09/11 10:40, Stuart Sutherland wrote:
>>>> Shalom,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I don't think the intent of "resp." is all that clear. To me,
>>>> "respectively" does not make much sense in the context in which "resp."
>>>> is used in 20.13.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "...to detect changes in the sampled value from the past (resp.
>>>> current) tick of the global clock to its current (resp. next) tick."
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "respectively" is an adverb used to refer to the exact order of a list.
>>>> For example, dictionary.com defines "respectively" as:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Separately or individually and in the order already mentioned (used
>>>> when enumerating two or more items or facts that refer back to a
>>>> previous
>>>> statement): "they received sentences of one year and eight months,
>>>> respectively"
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I am guessing that "with respect to" was intended meaning of "resp."
>>>> in the context of 20.13.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Stu
>>>> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>>>> Stuart Sutherland
>>>>
>>>> Sutherland HDL, Inc.
>>>>
>>>> stuart@sutherland-hdl.com
>>>>
>>>> 503-692-0898
>>>> www.sutherland-hdl.com <http://www.sutherland-hdl.com>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *From:* owner-sv-ac@eda.org [mailto:owner-sv-ac@eda.org] *On Behalf
>>>> Of *Bresticker, Shalom
>>>> *Sent:* Tuesday, August 09, 2011 10:16 AM
>>>> *To:* Stuart Sutherland; sv-ac@eda-stds.org;
>>>> neil.korpusik@oracle.com
>>>> *Subject:* RE: [sv-ac] Editorial change on "resp."
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Clearly, "respectively" was meant.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Shalom
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *From:* owner-sv-ac@eda.org [mailto:owner-sv-ac@eda.org] *On Behalf
>>>> Of *Stuart Sutherland
>>>> *Sent:* Tuesday, August 09, 2011 7:38 PM
>>>> *To:* sv-ac@eda-stds.org; neil.korpusik@oracle.com
>>>> *Subject:* [sv-ac] Editorial change on "resp."
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Dmitry and Neil,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Clause 20.13 uses the abbreviation "resp." twice. This
>>>> abbreviation is not used anywhere else in the LRM, and is not
>>>> defined. I just did a google search, and it is not a standard
>>>> abbreviation in the English language (it is in Dutch, Danish and
>>>> Swedish). Various definitions I found on web pages suggest "resp."
>>>> stands for "response" or "responsibility". The Dutch, Danish and
>>>> Swedish abbreviation translates to "respectively".
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Can I have approval to make an editorial change and spell out "resp."?
>>>> If so, what should I change it to? From the context, I am guessing
>>>> it means either "respectively" or "respective to", but I am not
>>>> sure what the AC committee intended when they used the non-standard
> abbreviation.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Stu
>>>> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>>>> Stuart Sutherland
>>>>
>>>> Sutherland HDL, Inc.
>>>>
>>>> stuart@sutherland-hdl.com
>>>>
>>>> 503-692-0898
>>>> www.sutherland-hdl.com <http://www.sutherland-hdl.com>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by
>>>> *MailScanner* <http://www.mailscanner.info/>, and is believed to be
>>>> clean.
>>>>
>>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> -
>>>> -
>>>> Intel Israel (74) Limited
>>>>
>>>> This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential material
>>>> for the sole use of the intended recipient(s). Any review or
>>>> distribution by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the
>>>> intended recipient, please contact the sender and delete all copies.
>>>> --
>>>> This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by
>>>> *MailScanner* <http://www.mailscanner.info/>, and is believed to be
>>>> clean.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by
>>>> *MailScanner* <http://www.mailscanner.info/>, and is believed to be
>>>> clean.
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Intel Israel (74) Limited
>>
>> This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential material for
>> the sole use of the intended recipient(s). Any review or distribution
>> by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended
>> recipient, please contact the sender and delete all copies.
>>
>>
>
> --
> 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.
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> Intel Israel (74) Limited
>
> This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential material for
> the sole use of the intended recipient(s). Any review or distribution
> by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended
> recipient, please contact the sender and delete all copies.
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Intel Israel (74) Limited

This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential material for
the sole use of the intended recipient(s). Any review or distribution
by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended
recipient, please contact the sender and delete all copies.

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