RE: P1666 Ballot resolution discussion - Part 5

David, Bishnupriya,

Regarding effort, I already have such a list. It just requires a little
tidying up and checking. It will not impact any other part of the work.

John A

From:
Bishnupriya Bhattacharya <bpriya@cadence.com>
To:
"john.aynsley@doulos.com" <john.aynsley@doulos.com>,
"systemc-p1666-technical@eda.org" <systemc-p1666-technical@eda.org>
Date:
27/04/2011 16:17
Subject:
RE: P1666 Ballot resolution discussion - Part 5
Sent by:
owner-systemc-p1666-technical@eda.org

John,
 
I agree the existing Annex D should be removed. Replacing that with a diff
between the previous LRM version and this version is more relevant, but
falls in the nice-to-have category in my mind ? to be assigned time only
in the absence of other higher priority items.
 
Thanks,
-Bishnupriya
 
From: owner-systemc-p1666-technical@eda.org [
mailto:owner-systemc-p1666-technical@eda.org] On Behalf Of
john.aynsley@doulos.com
Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2011 7:00 PM
To: systemc-p1666-technical@eda.org
Subject: Re: P1666 Ballot resolution discussion - Part 5
 
All,

One more thing. I had said previously to the Working Group that I intended
to revisit Annex D at this stage.

The existing Annex D lists the changes between SystemC version 2.0.1 and
2.1, and between version 2.1 and IEEE-2005. My proposal is to remove
these two lists at this time since they are rather historic, and to
replace them with a new list of changes between IEEE 1666-2005 and
1666-2011.

Does that sound like a good idea?

Thanks,

John A

TAF!

-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and 
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is 
believed to be clean. 
-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and 
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is 
believed to be clean. 
-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.