RE: [vhdl-200x] 1076 & Entity balloting

As I said before, if there are volunteers, please step forward. I certainly won't say no!

-Steve Bailey

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Erich Marschner [mailto:erichm@cadence.com <mailto:erichm@cadence.com> ]
> Sent: Friday, June 25, 2004 2:11 PM
> To: Bailey, Stephen; Jayaram Bhasker; vhdl-200x@eda.org
> Subject: RE: [vhdl-200x] 1076 & Entity balloting
>
> Steve,
>
> Just for reference, the PSL v1.01 and PSL v1.1 LRMs were
> edited by volunteers - specifically, by the chair and
> co-chair of the FVTC, with much help from committee members -
> since the initial funding for a technical editor for PSL ran
> out in July 2002, and Accellera was unable to find additional
> funds to continue the technical editing. It could be argued
> that editing of a mature and relatively stable standard such
> as VHDL 1076 should require less effort than that required
> for a standard such as PSL, in its first and second
> iteration. So I think Bhasker's suggestion has some merit.
>
> I also think that this whole discussion has been focused too
> much on monetary contributions from corporate entities. (One
> might say, heavy on dollars, and light on sense.) The
> biggest contribution to any standard is the time spent by
> experts in the field, nearly all of which is sponsored by
> some company. LRM editing is only one of many tasks that
> require both time and expertise. If corporate entities are
> willing to donate the time of domain experts to help define
> the standard, why wouldn't they also be willing to donate the
> time of those same experts (or if necessary, others who are
> skilled in technical writing) to maintaining the LRM, to make
> sure the standard is clearly specified?
>
> In particular, the VHDL 1993 LRM was edited by Paul Menchini.
> During most of that effort he was employed by my company,
> CLSI, and all of his time editing the LRM was donated by
> CLSI. We viewed this as part of our obligation to keep the
> standard alive and well. Furthermore, as a small company, we
> could afford to donate Paul's time, whereas we could not have
> afforded an equivalent monetary donation.
>
> Donations of time are relatively easy for a corporation to
> justify, because they keep the company informed about where a
> standard is going, and they give it an opportunity to have
> some influence without directly impacting the bottom line.
> Donations of money need a greater justification, and bring
> with them proprietary interests, business politics, and the
> potential for corruption in the form of selling influence to
> the highest bidder.
>
> I respect the fact that others feel differently, and I don't
> intend to proselytize, nor will I engage further in this
> debate, but my personal preference would be to continue
> looking for volunteers whose employers are willing to donate
> their valuable time, rather than depending upon monetary
> contributions to fund standards development.
>
> Regards,
>
> Erich
>
>
>
> | -----Original Message-----
> | From: owner-vhdl-200x@eda.org
> | [mailto:owner-vhdl-200x@eda.org <mailto:owner-vhdl-200x@eda.org> ] On Behalf Of Bailey, Stephen
> | Sent: Friday, June 25, 2004 2:39 PM
> | To: Jayaram Bhasker; vhdl-200x@eda.org
> | Subject: RE: [vhdl-200x] 1076 & Entity balloting
> |
> |
> | Bhasker,
> |
> | > -----Original Message-----
> | > From: Jayaram Bhasker [mailto:JBhasker@eSilicon.com <mailto:JBhasker@eSilicon.com> ]
> | >
> | > There is a 5th choice (other than the 4 listed by Steve),
> which many
> | > of the other WGs have
> | > used:
> | >
> | > 5) A volunteer editor.
> |
> | Editing the 1076 LRM is not the same as editing a standard which is
> | essentially defined by the implementation of packages in
> standard VHDL
> | source. The expertise required limits the universe of acceptable
> | technical editors significantly. In the past, the people
> qualified to
> | do this were unwilling to do so pro bono.
> |
> | If you are aware of someone who is both qualified and willing to do
> | the work as a volunteer, please let us know.
> |
> | -Steve Bailey
> |
Received on Fri Jun 25 15:08:58 2004