Quite so. At FDL in Lausanne last year, we had a join meeting of
the OOVHDL and SID Chairs. We proposed that the SID group focus on
language mechansims for specification and refinement of
communication between entities, and that the OOVHDL group focus on
language mechanisms for abstraction, encapsulation and inheritance
of data and (possibly) inheritance of interfaces and
implementation. We agreed that each group would keep track of what
the other was doing and make sure we didn't act at cross purposes.
These agreements were ratified at the OOVHDL group meeting that
followed. I think the proposed PAR wording takes account of this
agreement. Do you agree?
Looking at both, I *think* so. As long as you and Jim are both
prepared to go before the steering committee and defend your
separation of turf, I think things are OK. Just be prepared to either
implement or beat off renewed suggestions that the two groups should
be joined (note Steve Bailey's recent message). Of course, this isn't
the first time this subject has come up --- I think it's up in double
digits, at least. But some battles have to be continually refought.
Dave Barton <*>
dlb@averstar.com )0(
http://www.averstar.com/~dlb