[sv-bc] Re: Opinion on merging of P1364 and P1800

Gord,

The draft merge could be constructed in parallel with other work of the
subcommittees, but the detailed review of that draft cannot.

Just as SV-BC inherited almost all of 1364 backlog, most of the burden
for the review of the merge will probably fall on SV-BC.

Merging the LRMs will either result in fewer interpretations and errata
fixes or an increase in the hours worked by SV-BC.  There's always a
tradeoff.

-- Brad

-----Original Message-----
From: Gordon Vreugdenhil [mailto:gordonv@model.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, January 31, 2006 11:05 AM
To: stuart@sutherland-hdl.com
Cc: 'Brad Pierce'; sv-bc@eda.org; sv-ac@eda.org; sv-ec@eda.org
Subject: Re: [sv-ec] RE: [sv-ac] Re: [sv-bc] Opinion on merging of P1364
and P1800

Throwing in my 2 cents.  There are (at least) two kinds of
changes that the committees need to be dealing with -- true
errata and interpretations.  I think that it might be reasonable
to do the merge in parallel with the interpretation work (which
will likely take longer in discussion) and then have the
errata discussed and have the content of the interpretation
decisions brought into the merged text.  This might mean that
for interpretation issues that we would have only "provisional"
text approved and would need a quick reexamination to see if
the provisional text is still acceptable for the merged LRM.
I think that would maximize the opportunities for parallel work
and would encourage committees to deal with more substantive
interpretation issues earlier in the process.

Gord.
-- 
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Gordon Vreugdenhil                                503-685-0808
Model Technology (Mentor Graphics)                gordonv@model.com