[sv-ec] RE: [sv-ac] Unclear text in 'Functional coverage'

From: Bresticker, Shalom <shalom.bresticker_at_.....>
Date: Thu Jan 08 2009 - 21:40:24 PST
I don't agree.

Users should not be forced to do lexical analyses. I don't say that if the sentence were missing, then it would have to be added, but if it is already there, let's not take it out. I think the sentence is clear and uncomplicated and useful.

Shalom

> Thanks for pointing it out. Actually since it is not
> lexically possible, so that was source of my confusion -
> whether LRM wanted to mean something else. So I think the
> text should be dropped to avoid further confusion from other
> readers. What do you think?
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Intel Israel (74) Limited

This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential material for
the sole use of the intended recipient(s). Any review or distribution
by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended
recipient, please contact the sender and delete all copies.


-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.
Received on Thu Jan 8 21:41:03 2009

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Thu Jan 08 2009 - 21:41:35 PST