[P1800] TC status - for April 16th conference call

-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.



For April 16th, 2009

Original goal for TCs to complete ballot feedback: May 14th

- svac - status summary 

   Since it is possible to work in parallel on several issues, my *total* 
   effort estimation is 5-6ww. [Dmitry]

   May 21, 28 [Neil]

- svbc - status summary

   We see about 42/53 issues as trivial, out-of-scope or passed to other groups.
   Of the remainder, some are contentious and others appear to be answered by 
   the LRM but may require some clarification to be added (we want to avoid 
   this if possible).

   Given this workload, the SV-BC believes it is possible to meet a May 13 
   deadline-but it will be tight.

- svcc - status summary

   -------- Original Message --------
   Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2009 20:45:32 +0530
   From: Amit Kohli <akohli@cadence.com>

   Hi Charles,

   Some of the Mantis items assigned to me will need discussion and may
   not complete in time by May 14. I am noting the ones where a discussion
   is needed, and also the ones where I think the discussion may extend
   beyond May 14.

   2635, 2636: These relate to an import task returning a value. In my
	       opinion these are just language corrections. However, a
	       short discussion is important to ensure that the semantics
	       are agreed on. Could be done through email exchange as well.

   2638: Behavior of non context import call not specified.
	 This will result in discussions and arriving at an agreement might
      take longer than May 14.

   2639: Concept of a call chain
	 This will result in discussions and arriving at an agreement might
	 take longer than May 14

   Regards,

   --Amit

- svec - David Scott is requesting a 2-week extension to May 28




- verbiage used by TCs for ballot feedback for which no action will be taken 
  This needs to be agreed on. 
  

Proposed response to issue whose scope is too ambitious for current draft:
   "The committee read and considered this feedback. the committee believes it 
    is too broad for the scope of the draft to implement at this time but may 
    be considered for future revisions."
 
Proposed response to issue whose scope is outside P1800:
   "The committee read and considered this feedback.   The committee believes 
    it is not in the scope of the P1800 PAR as it was defined & agreed upon by 
    the P1800 WG"

Michael D. Kipness


Proposed response to issue whose scope is too ambitious for current draft:

 "The committee read and considered this feedback. While it has merit, the 
  committee believes it is not feasible to implement at this time."

Proposed response to issue whose scope is outside P1800:

   "The committee read and considered this feedback.   The committee believes 
    it is not in the scope or goals of the P1800 project as it was defined & 
    agreed upon by the P1800 WG"

Matt