Date: Mon Feb 27 2006 - 13:01:22 PST
One of the primary reasons that the Champions exist is to identify when issues are crossing committee boundaries to ensure that the LRM hangs together appropriately. Karen ________________________________ From: owner-sv-ac@eda.org [mailto:owner-sv-ac@eda.org] On Behalf Of Bresticker, Shalom Sent: Monday, February 27, 2006 10:48 AM To: Faisal Haque (fhaque); sv-ac@eda.org; sv-ec@eda.org Subject: RE: [sv-ac] division of responsibilities Hi, Faisal. In IEEE standards terminology, chapters are called clauses. I'm worried about one of the sub-committees discussing issues and making changes which unknowingly affect the other sub-committee. I guess the best thing to do is to copy both of the sub-committees if there is a doubt. It's good that there is some overlap between committee participants. Shalom ________________________________ From: Faisal Haque (fhaque) [mailto:fhaque@cisco.com] Sent: Monday, February 27, 2006 8:33 PM To: Bresticker, Shalom; sv-ac@eda.org; sv-ec@eda.org Subject: RE: [sv-ac] division of responsibilities Shalom, I am not sure but I think you meant chapter 17? .I think if the construct is used only in SVA then it should probably be owned by sv-ac. If it is general purpose then SV-EC or sv-BC? For clocking blocks it depends upon the issue and same for coverage. Can you describe the issue ? Thanks -Faisal ________________________________ From: owner-sv-ac@eda.org [mailto:owner-sv-ac@eda.org] On Behalf Of Bresticker, Shalom Sent: Sunday, February 26, 2006 12:41 AM To: sv-ac@eda.org; sv-ec@eda.org Subject: [sv-ac] division of responsibilities Hi, I'd like to get clarification of the division of responsibilities between SV-AC and SV-EC. Specifically, are all issues outside of Clause 17 the responsibility of SV-EC (or one of the others)? If SV-AC has issues related to clocking blocks or coverage, do they need to go through SV-EC? Thanks, Shalom Shalom Bresticker Intel Jerusalem LAD DA +972 2 589-6852 +972 54 721-1033 I don't represent Intel
