RE: [sv-cc] Definition of ref obj: 455 and 489

Jim,

That would be OK with me.
The proposal for 489 is more comprehensive than 455's.
Are you satisfied that the language in 489's proposal
addresses the issue expressed in 455?

Regards,
Doug

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-sv-cc@eda.org [mailto:owner-sv-cc@eda.org] On 
> Behalf Of Jim Vellenga
> Sent: Tuesday, April 12, 2005 6:02 AM
> To: sv-cc@eda.org
> Subject: [sv-cc] Definition of ref obj: 455 and 489
> 
> Should we declare 455 a duplicate of 489?
> 
> Regards,
> Jim Vellenga
> 
> --------------------------------------------------------- 
> James H. Vellenga                            978-262-6381 
> Engineering Director                   (FAX) 978-262-6636 
> Cadence Design Systems, Inc.         vellenga@cadence.com 
> 270 Billerica Rd 
> Chelmsford, MA 01824-4179 
> "We all work with partial information." 
> ---------------------------------------------------------- 
>   
> 
>