Subject: Model Mapping Question

From: [email-masked] (John Berrie)
Date: Thu, 9 Feb 95 13:46:10 GMT

Dear Ibisians,
Could anyone help me with a simple query ? 
The IBIS models I have seen all contain a mapping from pins to
driver/receiver models which are then defined in the same file.
It is, however, sometimes desirable to define this mapping directly in a
component library. Is it reasonable to allow specification of the
driver/receiver model name directly on the pins in the library as an
alternative to referencing the models at the component level, or could
there be a name clash with another model using the same name for a
different characteristic ?
Presumably, this could be overcome by also specifying the model at the
component level, but what if none exists but we want to specify a driver
model at the pin level which is defined somewhere else ?

Thank you in advance for your anticipated help.

John

Best Regards,

John 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
John Berrie, Chief Application Engineer    
Zuken-Redac Limited,                                                    
Green Lane,Tewkesbury,
Glos. GL20 8HE, England
Tel: (44) 0684 294161
Fax:(44) 0684 299754
E-Mail [email-masked]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

---

From: [email-masked] (C. Kumar)
Date: Thu, 9 Feb 95 09:42:37 -0500

I believe this refers to our old discussion about component centered versus
buffer (pin) centered representation. I agree that there is a case  for 
organizing data on a buffer centric basis but we have no provisions for it now. May be we can reopen this discussion.

---

From: [email-masked] (John Berrie)
Date: Thu, 9 Feb 95 15:47:15 GMT

>Thanks,
I presume the original reason is that the method provides the safest
environment for independent model development, to avoid name clashes. There
is only one drawback except for data size that I can see: that is,
experimenting with 'What If' scenarios is made less straightforward.

John

>organizing data on a buffer centric basis but we have no provisions for it
>now. May be we can reopen this discussion.
>> 
>> Dear Ibisians,

Best Regards,

John