[sv-ec] RE: proposals for 2848 and 2845

________________________________
From: Bresticker, Shalom [mailto:shalom.bresticker@intel.com]
Sent: Sunday, November 21, 2010 10:47 PM
To: Francoise Martinolle; sv-ec@server.eda.org
Subject: RE: proposals for 2848 and 2845

Hi, Francoise.

Editorial points:

Both 2845 and 2848 add proposals in the same place in the LRM, and thus conflict from an editorial point of view. Maybe you should combine them into a single proposal.

Yes I could do what you say or :
     make one proposal add a paragraph before the section I quoted
and the other mantis add after the paragraph so there is no conflict.

Also, if you are going to define a new term, "strong type", it is probably good to do this in one of the sections on types, such as 6.22, and thus make the term available for general use. It is not good for each section to define its own terms, where the term is not specific to its context. In this case, for example, "strong type" is not in and of itself, a term describing interfaces.

True, it may be worth while defining the term, I made this up as I could not figure out how to refer to these types that are only
matching themselves in the same instance.

Regards,
Shalom

From: owner-sv-ec@eda.org [mailto:owner-sv-ec@eda.org] On Behalf Of Francoise Martinolle
Sent: Monday, November 22, 2010 5:25 AM
To: sv-ec@server.eda.org
Subject: [sv-ec] proposals for 2848 and 2845

I uploaded 2 draft proposals for 2848 and 2845 (virtual interfaces).

--
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner<http://www.mailscanner.info/>, and is
believed to be clean.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
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.