RE: [sv-ac] new mantis item and proposal #1641

I looked again. They are very similar, but I agree they are different
enough that it is not worth trying to combine them, so I withdraw my
comment. 

Thanks for the alertness.

Shalom

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-sv-ac@server.eda.org [mailto:owner-sv-ac@server.eda.org]
On
> Behalf Of Warmke, Doug
> Sent: Tuesday, October 24, 2006 6:48 PM
> To: sv-ac@server.eda-stds.org
> Subject: RE: [sv-ac] new mantis item and proposal #1641
> 
> Hi Shalom,
> 
> I looked at the two sections of the proposal.
> At first glance they look almost the same,
> but if you read closely, they are quite different.
> 
> The only common point is the one Manisha added to
> address your earlier suggestion.  (On the simulation
> time reporting being moved into those two sections.)
> 
> Do you have any suggestions for improvement?
> I can't think of any better structuring.
> 
> Thanks,
> Doug
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-sv-ac@server.eda.org
> > [mailto:owner-sv-ac@server.eda.org] On Behalf Of Bresticker, Shalom
> > Sent: Tuesday, October 24, 2006 12:29 AM
> > To: Kulshrestha, Manisha; sv-ac@server.eda-stds.org
> > Subject: RE: [sv-ac] new mantis item and proposal #1641
> >
> > Hi, Manisha.
> >
> > In the proposal, 22.7.1 and 22.7.2 are almost the same. Is
> > there a need
> > for two separate subsections with duplicated information?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Shalom