RE: [sv-ac] Dragt7: LTL operators (1932) are not in Annex F

Hi Stu,

 

There is your own note #7008 saying that the second part related to the
Annex F had not been implemented in Draft 6 and that it would be
implemented in the future draft. There is no problem with the champions'
approval, and there is Neil's note (#6628) stating clearly that the
proposal consists of two parts: LTL_Formal.080317.pdf and
LTL.1932.080422.pdf. This is a SS problem, and it needs to be addressed.
Since the current Mantis item contains the complete information, I don't
see why another Mantis item should be open on this subject.

 

Neil, what should be the process in this case?

 

Thanks,

Dmitry

 

From: Stuart Sutherland [mailto:stuart@sutherland-hdl.com] 
Sent: Monday, September 15, 2008 7:38 PM
To: Korchemny, Dmitry
Cc: sv-ac@eda.org
Subject: RE: [sv-ac] Dragt7: LTL operators (1932) are not in Annex F

 

Dmitry,

 

The latest proposal listed for Mantis 1932 is the file
"LTL.1932.080422.pdf
<http://www.eda-twiki.org/svdb/file_download.php?file_id=3609&type=bug> ",
dated 2008-04-22 12:25. There is nothing in that proposal that makes any
changes to Annex F.  If there are portions of this Mantis item that were
not contained in the latest proposal file, then it is a mistake in the
proposal itself, and not an editor error.  

 

When multiple proposal files are listed in a Mantis item, only the file
with the most recent time stamp is implemented.  The only exception
would be if the file names are clearly labeled as Part 1 and a Part 2,
and the Champions and Working Group reviewed and approved both parts. 

 

I do not know if the Champions committee and the Working Group reviewed
and approved anything other than the proposal with the latest time stamp
in Mantis 1932.  Since the latest proposal does not indicate that a
second, earlier-dated, file is supposed to be included in the changes, I
doubt that a second file was approved.  Please ask Neil if a new Mantis
item should be filed to correct a proposal that has already been
implemented, or if 1932 should be returned to editor status with a bug
note indicating the error(s) in the proposal that need to be corrected.

 

Stu
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Stuart Sutherland
stuart@sutherland-hdl.com
+1-503-692-0898

www.sutherland-hdl.com



 

From: owner-sv-ac@eda.org [mailto:owner-sv-ac@eda.org] On Behalf Of
Korchemny, Dmitry
Sent: Sunday, September 14, 2008 10:50 PM
To: stuart@sutherland-hdl.com
Cc: sv-ac@eda.org
Subject: [sv-ac] Dragt7: LTL operators (1932) are not in Annex F

 

Hi Stu,

 

The formal semantics of LTL operators (Mantis 1932, file
LTL_Formal.080317.pdf
<http://www.eda-stds.org/mantis/file_download.php?file_id=3502&type=bug>
) is not in the Annex F yet. In order to issue the Draft6 earlier we
agreed to postpone changes in Annex F to the next draft, but they are
missing from the Draft7 as well. When these changes are supposed to be
done?

 

Thanks,

Dmitry

---------------------------------------------------------------------
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. 

---------------------------------------------------------------------
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.