Re: [vhdl-200x] Call for Vote: Motion to Approve Draft PAR Submission

There is actually an elegant solution to the "entity membership and voting"
quandary. I think the DASC should extend a friendly hand to the CAG and ask
it to co-sponsor the proposed PAR. Then the PAR will benefit from an
established entity membership in the CAG as the voting constituency, while
retaining the individual membership of the WG to do the important work of
actually developing the standard.
I know that in this way some WG members would be disenfranchised when the
official vote was called, but that is no different from what has happened in
the past when some members of WGs who were not IEEE members did not get to
have their votes counted by the IEEE.
There is always more than one way to solve a problem, some times one needs
to look at it from a different point of view. The WG could, for example,
hold an internal vote on the proposed standard by DASC members to make sure
that the "sense of the community" was correctly captured in the standard.
Then the official IEEE vote could be called, thus providing the stamp of
approval and implicit marketing support by the entities.
Gabe
----- Original Message -----
From: "Michael McNamara" <mac@verisity.com>
To: "Bailey, Stephen" <SBailey@model.com>
Cc: <vhdl-200x@eda.org>
Sent: Wednesday, July 21, 2004 1:31 AM
Subject: RE: [vhdl-200x] Call for Vote: Motion to Approve Draft PAR
Submission

>
> Just to make it clear - I am all for getting the industry behind
> standards.
>
> It just seems prudent for we the members of the 1076 group to await
> the DASC completing its definition of entity membership (especially
> price) before we construct a PAR that can have only entity members, of
> which there can be none until such time.
>
> I like my pools full of water before I jump in ;-)
>
> -- On Jul 20 2004 at 22:13, Bailey, Stephen sent a message:
> > To: vhdl-200x@eda.org
> > Subject: "RE: [vhdl-200x] Call for Vote: Motion to Approve Draft PAR
Submi ssion"
> > [Dennis's email bounced as he sent it from an account other than the
one he is subscribed with. -Steve Bailey]
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> >
> > __X__ Disapprove (comments required)
> >
> > I stand by my first opinion that an entity-based constituency is better
than the individual-based constituency configuration to drive acceptance and
adoption by suppliers and consumers of future versions of VHDL. The slow
uptake by the industry of VHDL-93 is proof in point that was well described
by the Cadence Design Systems tutorial at CHDL-97 where they fired the
"'shot over the bow' in the VHDL 1998 wars". (See
http://www.it.uc3m.es/~ifip/chdl97/tut-mb.html
<http://www.it.uc3m.es/~ifip/chdl97/tut-mb.html> ).
> >
> > There should be no fear to seek market opinion to drive the evolution
of VHDL. There should be fear when it is not sought.
> >
> > -Dennis
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Bailey, Stephen
> > Sent: Saturday, July 17, 2004 7:18 PM
> > To: 'VHDL-200x'
> > Subject: [vhdl-200x] Call for Vote: Motion to Approve Draft PAR
Submission to DASC Ch air
> >
> > This is a call to vote on the Peter Ashenden's motion, as amended by
Jim Lewis's motion that the WG approved, to approve a Draft revision PAR for
submission to the DASC Chair for approval and submission to NESCOM.
> >
> > That the VASG approve the attached revision PAR for IEEE Std 1076?
> >
> > ____ Approve (comments optional)
> >
> > ____ Disapprove (comments required)
> >
> > ____ Abstain (comments optional)
> >
> > The vote closes at 9am US East Coast Time, 2 Aug 04.
> >
> > As a PAR involves the scope of the WG and the DASC model P&P for WGs
requires a 2/3 approval of the working group membership to approve change of
the working group scope, it is important that all voting members respond to
this call for vote.
> >
> > I have attached a copy of the voting membership. Individuals listed in
red font have lost voting membership by failing to meet participation
requirements. If your name is in red font and you believe that you have met
participation requirements, send me a private email so we can resolve the
issue. Otherwise, individuals who's names are in red may cast an unofficial
vote as the first step in re-establishing their participation track record.
> >
> > Thank you.
> > <<draft_PAR_JL_revised.html>> <<PAR_motion_vote_roster.htm>>
> > ------------
> > Stephen Bailey
> > ModelSim Verification TME
> > Mentor Graphics
> > sbailey@model.com
> > 303-775-1655 (mobile, preferred)
> > 720-494-1202 (office)
> > www.model.com <www.model.com> <www.model.com <www.model.com> >
Received on Wed Jul 21 05:23:07 2004