Re: [sv-ac] SV-AC: "Which" for "tha"t editing changes

Hi Ben,

> I agree that they should be carefully reviewed. For section 16 and
17, there
> are 13 simple changes that I identified. The review process and
voting can
> be done over email.

At this point in time the Editor is allowed to make purely Editorial
changes.
It is up to the Editor to determine if he is comfortable making those
changes
on his own, without technical committee approval.

What you are referring to as "simple changes" to clauses 16 and 17 has
caused
at least one person to disagree with a few of the suggested changes. It
appears
that those changes aren't as simple as you suggest.

Mantis 4002 has been moved back to the new state.

My recommendation to the Editor is that he not make any of the changes
suggested in the proposal for mantis 4002 without approval from the SV-AC
Technical Committee.

Neil

On 01/05/12 05:07, ben cohen wrote:
> I agree that they should be carefully reviewed. For section 16 and 17,
> there are 13 simple changes that I identified. The review process and
> voting can be done over email.
> Ben
>
> On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 11:28 PM, Korchemny, Dmitry
> <dmitry.korchemny@intel.com <mailto:dmitry.korchemny@intel.com>> wrote:
>
> Hi Neil,
>
> But these are massive changes, I think they should be carefully
> reviewed.
>
> Dmitry
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Neil Korpusik [mailto:neil.korpusik@oracle.com
> <mailto:neil.korpusik@oracle.com>]
> Sent: Thursday, January 05, 2012 03:06
> To: ben@systemverilog.us <mailto:ben@systemverilog.us>
> Cc: Bresticker, Shalom; sv-ac@eda-stds.org
> <mailto:sv-ac@eda-stds.org>; Korchemny, Dmitry;
> stuart@sutherland-hdl.com <mailto:stuart@sutherland-hdl.com>
> Subject: Re: [sv-ac] SV-AC: "Which" for "tha"t editing changes
>
> Hi Ben,
>
> There isn't a defined process for finding such problems.
> We simply fix these types of things when we find them.
>
>
> Neil
>
>
>
> On 01/04/12 12:36, ben cohen wrote:
> > I filed http://www.eda-stds.org/svdb/view.php?id=4002
> > Shalom, what is the process to have all the committees review their
> > sections for such errors.
> > It would be best have a professional IEEE document with good grammar.
> >
> > Summary 0004002: "Which" for "tha"t editing changes for AL
> OF LRM
> > Description The LRM has several grammatical errors, with the most
> > striking one being the misuse of the pronouns "which" and "that"
> > Attached is mantis for recommended editing changes for sections
> 16 and 17.
> >
> > *However, ALL of the LRM needs to be reviewed, and each responsible
> > committee should review their sections for proper
> > grammar.*
> >
> >
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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.