RE: [sv-cc] Re: [P1800] Questions on our activities during the ballot period.

Oh, well. I tried.

Another question and two more comments.

Why is it an unacceptable resolution that a change will be considered for the
next version of the standard? If the balloters don't like it, they can still
vote no.

The amount of time allocated for the committees to resolve the issues is about
2 weeks. I looked at what happened on 1364-2001. The amount of time needed
there was substantially more. I fear that either the quality or the schedule
is going to be in jeopardy.

So far as I can see, the supplemental files for both 1800 and 1364 have not
been posted. At least, they are not on our regular web site, and Noelle said
they would not be on the special ballot web site. I think those files are 
esential for balloters to do their job well.

Thanks,
Shalom


On Thu, 24 Feb 2005, Johny Srouji wrote:

> 
> That's true, but please note (I have double checked w/ Noelle) that
> technical committees are not allowed to contact the balloters to discuss
> resolutions, or even publish resolutions in some common area (committee
> web, minutes, etc) or forum where everyone could see them, before the
> ballot closes. This is to prevent any inappropriate attempt to
> inadvertently influence voters while the ballot remains open. 
> 
> Even though I understand the need to start the technical work earlier if
> possible, in order to balance the work load expected and meet our
> schedule, I am reluctant to starting the technical issues resolutions
> early. 
> 
> Regards, 
> 
> --- Johny. 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "Stuart Sutherland" <stuart@sutherland-hdl.com> 
> 
> 
> 02/24/2005 02:45 PM 
> 
> 
> Please respond to
> stuart
> 
> 
> To
> <Shalom.Bresticker@freescale.com>, Johny Srouji/Austin/IBM@IBMUS 
> 
> cc
> "'IEEE1800'" <ieee1800@eda.org>, "'SV-CC'" <sv-cc@eda.org> 
> 
> Subject
> RE: [sv-cc] Re: [P1800] Questions on our activities during the ballot
> period.
> 
> 	
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shalom,
> 
> I think you are correct that most entities will hold off until near the
> end
> of the ballot period to submit their ballots.  They do not have to
> though,
> if I understand this new electronic balloting process correctly.  I
> believe
> a balloter can submit a ballot early in the process, and add additional
> comments that support the ballot response anytime during the process.
> 
> Of course, we can always hope that everyone will just vote yes with no
> comments :)
> 
> Stu
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> Stuart Sutherland
> stuart@sutherland-hdl.com
> +1-503-692-0898
>  
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-sv-cc@eda.org [mailto:owner-sv-cc@eda.org] On 
> > Behalf Of Shalom.Bresticker@freescale.com
> > Sent: Wednesday, February 23, 2005 7:45 PM
> > To: Johny Srouji
> > Cc: IEEE1800; SV-CC
> > Subject: [sv-cc] Re: [P1800] Questions on our activities 
> > during the ballot period.
> > 
> > Johny,
> > 
> > I would actually assume that most of the ballots will arrive 
> > at the last minute. If I were a (entity) balloter, I would 
> > wait till the end of the period in the knowledge that 
> > otherwise a new issue could be spotted after ballot 
> > submission. Also, many of the balloters will have more than 
> > one person reviewing and submitting comments within their entity. 
> > So I would wait till getting the responses of the last of my 
> > reviewers. Plus, because people have regular tasks to do as 
> > well, it takes time to do these reviews, which are extra tasks.
> > 
> > This is also the experience I had in an internal company 
> > ballot process a few months ago.
> > 
> > In that case, if you don't let the committees start 
> > discussing issues before the official ballot submissions, 
> > they are going to be overloaded with work in the extremely 
> > short time allocated for the ballot resolution process. In 
> > that case, the resolutions to valid problems found are going 
> > to be quick and dirty and not of the quality desired in some cases. 
> > 
> > That is what happened in 1364-2001. Valid problems were 
> > brought up during the ballot, 'swept' under the carpet during 
> > the resolution, and came back to haunt us later.
> > 
> > All my personal opinion, of course.
> > 
> > Regards,
> > 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