RE: [vhdlsynth] Status of P1076.3 + call for discussion of WG options

Dave,

Thank you for raising the possibility of DATC sponsorship or involvement in
a numerics workshop. I think this would be a very positive move. I would
encourage you, members of the 1076.3 WG and other interested parties to
explore the idea, and report on it at the DASC-SC meeting in June. I have
an agenda item for the meeting to consider activities for 2004/2005.

Regards,

Peter Ashenden
DASC Chair

--
Dr. Peter J. Ashenden                        peter@ashenden.com.au
Ashenden Designs Pty. Ltd.                   www.ashenden.com.au
PO Box 640                                   Ph:  +61 8 8339 7532
Stirling, SA 5152                            Fax: +61 8 8339 2616
Australia                                    Mobile: +61 414 70 9106
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-stds-dasc-sc@eda.org 
> [mailto:owner-stds-dasc-sc@eda.org] On Behalf Of David Barton
> Sent: Thursday, 29 April 2004 23:31
> To: stds-dasc-sc@eda.org
> Subject: Re: [vhdlsynth] Status of P1076.3 + call for 
> discussion of WG options
> 
> 
> Alex and Peter, I would like to address a single point:
> 
> >
> > Regarding the potential for new standards projects to come out of a
> numeric
> > summit:  DASC certainly has procedures for dealing that.  
> The process 
> > is
> to
> > form a Study Group to collect the requirements, ensure interest and 
> > resources exist to develop the new standard, and prepare 
> the scope and 
> > purpose for a PAR. If I might borrow your stellar metaphor, a 
> > precedent is the galaxy of 1076.x standards that condensed from the 
> > 1076 nebula.
> 
> I would like to suggest (and I emphasize that it is only a 
> suggestion) that it may be too soon for a standard to come 
> out of the numeric work as yet.  A preliminary step might be 
> for a workshop to get together and discuss the various 
> numeric formats, the needs of industry, and how these might 
> be melded, with a study group to follow out of such a 
> workshop.  The formation of a study group is not necessarily 
> the first step; a workshop, or even two or three, may be the 
> first steps to explore the technical issues involved. I can 
> certainly offer the auspices of the DATC under which such 
> workshops may be held (and they can be co-located with the 
> DASC meetings if that is convenient; it simply avoids the 
> standards bucket for a bit).
> 
> If this is desired, by all means let me know.  Alex, if you 
> want to form a study group instead, and if this is agreeable 
> to the DASC, then by all means go that route.  The point is, 
> the mechanism should serve *us*; we should not get wrapped 
> around the axle with the mechanism.  I have been getting the 
> feeling, with some of the discussions lately, that we have 
> been missing that point.  The procedures are there to help 
> us, not hinder.
> 
> Dave Barton
> DATC Chair-Elect
> 
>