Subject: Bird 48 comments from HyperLynx

From: Kellee Crisafulli <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 04 Jun 1998 14:42:59 -0700

Hi IBIS,

  We had a meeting and discussed bird 48 with our
engineering team with the following feedback:

1) The re-use of the MODEL keyword confuses usage of this
   bird to the point that we will vote NO unless a new keyword
   like SUB_MODEL is used.  We found no one in the office
   could understand how to use the add model concept without
   a group discussion of what it meant.  The biggest confusion
   is that sometimes a MODEL is a real model and sometimes
   it is a sub-model that isn't a real model.  I understand
   it was easier to write this way but it is very confusing.

   To fix it just use a new keyword SUB_MODEL.  
   The add model then is ADD SUB_MODEL which is much clearer about
   what is happening.

2) If the above keyword change is made then we should re-use
   "model spec" and not add the new "sub-model spec" syntax.
   This is consistent with the re-use of VI tables etc.

3) It is essential that the SUB_MODEL keyword explicitly define
   which keywords can be used.  The present documentation requires
   considerable reading to determine what is allowed.  This should
   be in more bullet like form that is easy to speed read.

We feel this is a minor change and will fully support this bird with
the above changes.  We will oppose this bird without this change on
the basis that it is too difficult to understand.

Kellee
Matt
Steve

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Have a great day...
Kellee Crisafulli at HyperLynx
[email-masked]	http://www.hyperlynx.com
-------------------------------------------------------------------------