Hi Guys, Here is a response that I received from Dennis regarding the incorporation of DPI docs in our specs. He makes some good points. While it does not address the ability for us to divide our own doc, which is not an IEEE spec at this time, it may require us to rethink some of the issues. Dennis >> I understand. Of course, much of this get complicated with IEEE standardization. They don't allow re-shipping/formatting of their work. You get it as a whole from them and if you need a piece from here and piece from there, that's the way it is. The DPI is heading towards approval by the IEEE in P1800 in a month. So this is in front of us now. I'm certainly open to have the "references" easily at hand. I often think it is easy to just link to a bookmark within a PDF file to jump to where you want to go, but if a supplier wants this to be all within a single file, I know it is possible to make this happen. The only issue is standard references may grow stale and not keep pace with what we do with them. Example, today one might reference Accellera SystemVerilog 3.1a DPI section - or include it in a larger document; but what do you do when it becomes an IEEE standard and has a few small changes to it. (There are actually issues like this to contend with, like some byte re-ordering if I'm not mistaken between Accellera and the IEEE version for some info that would be disastrous if we allowed two different versions to float around out there just because one version was easy to reference or include in another document vs. referencing the most recent version from a source that is less flexible. One way around your issue, as I have seen in the past is, experts in the standard will author books targeted for special and focused needs. I know this is a lot of writing and slows the introduction of technology. We have given permission in the past to authors of such texts to extract from our work for such needs.Received on Thu Aug 18 07:40:28 2005
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Thu Aug 18 2005 - 07:41:49 PDT