|
Meeting 6 MinutesTeleconference, July 7th, 2004A quorum of 10 out of 16 voting members was present. Attendence is indicated on the web site roster 1. Call to orderMeeting was called to order at 09:02 PST/16:02 GMT.2. Approval of minutes from meeting 5Darren Galpin moves to approve the minutes.Dave Tokic seconds. No objections/abstainers. The motion to approve the minutes was carried. 3. Election for ChairYaron was the only nominee, with not other candidates being submitted during the 14 day period. 21 out of the 22 possible people who could vote voted. This is a two year nomination, and the officers are now nominated according to DASC rules. Serrie has posted the results into the e-mail archive.4. Revision of BylawsAs part of the DASC governance revision process, there are now model bylaws for working groups that are recommended to all WG’s. There is nothing special in the groups previous bylaws, so a variant of these model bylaws with modifications by Yaron was posted on the website. The modifications were:• Section 1. Task Group leads added as officers. • Section 4.1. Active participation requires attendance of 3 out of 4 meetings. New DASC rules require 2 out of 3, but our rules should not be a problem. Mike MacNamara asked if the current meeting counted in the 3 out of 4, or only the previous 3 meetings. Yaron said that he did not know, but will clarify this and express it unambiguously in the document. • Section 4.4. Review of membership sanctions for members who do not attend adequately.Yaron thought that the DASC rules give too much leeway and power to the group Chair, so has modified the rules to explicitly tie them to attendance. Mike MacNamara stated that the Computer Society also wished to include e-mail participation, and that DASC should accept our proposals as other groups have questioned DASC rules. • Others. A notification period of 30 days for meeting was added, and simple majority voting rules added. Yaron stated that only about 2% of the text should have been changed, and there were no further comments from the floor. Yaron then stated that we could either (1) vote to accept, or (2) have additional review time. Darren Galpin then stated that he had read the proposed document, and that he thought it was acceptable. Darren Galpin moves to accept the document. Andy Piziali seconds. No objections/abstainers. The motion to approve the minutes was carried. 5. LRM Revision ScheduleRon is busy at the moment on other projects, so the schedule has slipped. A revised LRM is to be expected mid-August. Task Force leads are advised to submit issues before the end of July to be included in the new LRM. After this, you should wait for the new LRM to continue your review.6. Task force updatesTF2 - Basic LanguageChris Macionski said that not a lot had happened since the last meeting. The group was reviewing the keyword issue, but it was split over what to do. The group will write up its proposals and resubmit them to the eWG for a ballot. TF3 - AOP Matan Vax said that they had had only one meeting, and only he showed up for it. There was one issue he was thinking about (semantics of method extensions). TF4 - Constraints and Generation Ken Sailor said that there had been no meeting during this period. The main issue was how to describe constraint generation without tieing oneself to a specific algorithm. Yaron suggested a smaller group work on it and generate a loose definition, and then move this result to a larger group for discussion. TF5 - Coverage Andy Piziali said that 6 out of 8 sections of chapter 12 of the LRM had been reviewed, with 12.5 and 12.8 still missing. 13 issues have been reported. Need to complete the review, and record a proposal for temporal coverage. Yaron said that this could be discussed at the next TF meeting. TF6 - Temporals David van Campenhout was absent, and Yaron said that not much had happened. TF7 - TCM's Matthew Morley was on vacation. TF8 - Foreign access Pitchumani Guruswamy said that the team held 7 meetings, the last one just was last week. They have covered chapters 25 and 6, resulting in 30 issues submitted. 7. Patent policyThe IEEE SA has revised the patent policy to require a call for essential patents to be made by the chair at each meeting.Call for essential patents: "if any individual believes that a patent or patent application might be essential to the implementation of the standard, that fact should be made known to the entire working group" 8. Next meetingPlease remember to send e-mail to rollcall@ieee1647.org so that your attendance on this call is registered.• Please DON'T send these e-mails to the reflector • Use the e-mail address you registered with Yaron : I propose to have the next meeting on Monday, August 30th at 9:00 AM pacific (same time as today's meeting). No other business to discuss. 9. AdjournMotion to adjourn by DarrenSecond: by everyone else (said Yaron). |
| IEEE/SA home IEEE Standards Association |
DASC Home Design Automation Standards Committee |
VLSG Home Verification Language Study Group |
The
1647 PAR Project Authorization Form |
(Updated Wed Oct 11 16:18:27 PDT 2006)