[sv-bc] Package export proposal (2 alternatives)

I've uploaded 2 variants of the package export proposal to Mantis
    http://www.verilog.org/svdb/bug_view_page.php?bug_id=0001323

The proposals incorporate Brad's formatting and removal of the
unnumbered paragraph headings.

The 2 alternatives differ in how named exports are handled.
In particular, if you have:
    export p1::x;
Does the declaration of "x" in "p1" need to be visible via
an import of "p1" or is it acceptable to have the export
be legal as long as "p1::x" is visible via some export from
another package that is imported?

The "alt1" proposal has the sentence:
    The declaration being exported must be imported from the same
    package_name used in the export.

The "alt2" proposal has the sentence:
    The declaration is not required to be imported from the package_name
    of the export as long as some import has made the declaration available.

The examples in "alt1" have been modified to reflect the tighter
rule; the "alt2" proposal keeps the examples in the form of the
earlier proposal.


I am fine with either approach.  "alt2" is a bit more subtle in
terms of how names flow and when an import is required.  "alt1"
would be a bit more pedantic in some cases but makes the
symmetry between import and export more explicit.

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