Re: [P1800] p1364-2005 introduction and clause numbering

From: Shalom Bresticker <Shalom.Bresticker@freescale.com>
Date: Sun Jan 23 2005 - 07:24:13 PST

Thanks, I remember.

But I strongly believe the balloters should be able to voice their opinions about them.

Shalom

n.humenick@ieee.org wrote:

> Hi Shalom:
>
> I just want to mention that the introduction and the participants list do
> not need to be finalized before the ballot. These are part of the front
> matter, and are not considered a part of the official standard.
>
> Thanks,
> Noelle
>
>
> Shalom.Bresticker@fr
> eescale.com To: ieee1800@eda.org
> Sent by: cc: etf@boyd.com, btf@boyd.com, ptf@boyd.com, btf-ip@boyd.com
> owner-ieee1800@eda.o Subject: [P1800] p1364-2005 introduction and clause numbering
> rg
>
>
> 01/22/2005 02:36 PM
> Please respond to
> Shalom.Bresticker
>
>
>
> I am going to keep pestering until these issues are settled.
>
> 1. P1364-2005 needs a new introduction. Look at the one in 1364-2001,
> and what appears in the p1800 draft.
>
> The IEEE Standards Style Manual says,
>
> "An introduction shall be supplied by the working group, giving the
> history of the standard, a description of its purpose, and, if the standard
> is a revision, an explanation of the principal changes from the previous
> edition."
>
> 2. It also needs a new participants list. Again, see 1364-2001 and p1800
> draft. The style manual says,
> "At a minimum, a roster of the officers and members of the working group
> that developed the document shall be provided by the working group.
> Individuals or entities that also contributed to the preparation of the
> document may be included in addition to the working group list."
>
> (Stu, the ballot group list should say "entity members" instead of just
> "members".)
>
> 3. Clause numbering. It appears 1364 has to add a Normative References
> clause as Clause 2. This moves the others by one, including the PLI 1.0
> sections referenced in 1364-2001.
>
> If we want to try to maintain the 2001 numbering as much as possible,
> I have two suggestions:
>
> a. move Clause 11 (Disabling of tasks and named blocks) into Clause 10
> (Tasks and functions).
>
> b. move Clause 5 (Scheduling semantics) to before Clause 12 (Hierarchies).
>
> Doing these two together would change the numbers of only clauses 2-4, 5,
> and 11. 2-4 would become 3-5, 5 would become 11, and 11 would be part of
> 10.
>
> Shalom
>
> --
> Shalom Bresticker Shalom.Bresticker @freescale.com
> Design & Verification Methodology Tel: +972 9 9522268
> Freescale Semiconductor Israel, Ltd. Fax: +972 9 9522890
> POB 2208, Herzlia 46120, ISRAEL Cell: +972 50 5441478
>
> [ ]Freescale Internal Use Only [ ]Freescale Confidential Proprietary

--
Shalom Bresticker                        Shalom.Bresticker @freescale.com
Design & Verification Methodology                    Tel: +972 9  9522268
Freescale Semiconductor Israel, Ltd.                 Fax: +972 9  9522890
POB 2208, Herzlia 46120, ISRAEL                     Cell: +972 50 5441478
[ ]Freescale Internal Use Only      [ ]Freescale Confidential Proprietary
Received on Sun Jan 23 07:24:46 2005

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sun Jan 23 2005 - 07:24:47 PST