Subject: Re: [vhdl-200x] RE: Advisory vote: simple subset of PSL
From: Evan Lavelle (eml@riverside-machines.com)
Date: Mon Sep 15 2003 - 04:50:49 PDT
Bailey, Stephen wrote:
> First, neither the WG nor the IEEE requires that PSL be an IEEE standard. The 1.01 version of PSL was approved by the Accellera board as reported in the 2 June 2003 Press Release http://www.accellera.org/press19.html.
>
> Second, we have no plan or desire to duplicate or modify the PSL standard by physically incorporating it (duplicating in part or whole) into the VHDL standard. It will be incorporated by reference. Therefore, any Accellera (or IEEE, if PSL has been donated to IEEE by then) changes to PSL up to a cut-off point determined by when we (the WG) decide it is OK to ballot will be automatically included. This is entirely in compliance to Accellera's "Declaration of Conditions of Use Without License Accellera Property Specification Language" http://www.accellera.org/pslconditions.html.
I'm not keen on this idea of incorporating by reference, for a couple of
reasons:
1 Licensing
------------
As various people have pointed out, PSL is evolving. What exactly is the
'PSL' referred to in <http://www.accellera.org/pslconditions.html>? Is
it possible that Accellera could decide that some earlier version of
what we consider to be PSL isn't actually the 'real' PSL? Is it possible
that Accellera could change the licence conditions in the future, or for
a future version of PSL? And, of course, we can't rely on a licence
statement of the website - is there any other legal documentation
covering licensing?
2 Versions
----------
Clearly, you can't reference the 'current' version of PSL - you have to
reference a specific document which covers a specific version of PSL.
But, this gives us a problem - future versions of PSL could evolve in a
way that is dictated by the requirements of SystemVerilog, rather than
VHDL or Verilog.
Does IBM have a public specification for 1.01? If so, would this be a
suitable alternative?
Evan
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Mon Sep 15 2003 - 04:53:26 PDT