Attendees: 
(Reorganzied by company name, alphabetically)

[--xxxxx]           Yatin Trivedi (ASIC Group, Chair)
[-----xx]	    Tarak Parikh (@HDL)
[--xx-xx]           Francoise Martinole (Cadence)
[xxx--xx]           Stuart Swan (Cadence)
[------x]	    John Amouroux (Mentor) 
[------x]	    Emerald Holzwarth (Mentor)
[-----xx]	    John Stickley (Mentor)
[------x]	    Doug Warmke (Mentor)
[--xx-xx]           Michael Rohleder (Motorola)
[xxx-xxx]           Kevin Cameron (National Semi)
[x------]           Tayung Liu (Novas)
[-xxxx-x]           Bassam Tabbara (Novas)
[-----xx]	    Swapnajit Mittra (SGI)
[--x----]           Darryl Parham (Sun)
[xxx-x--]           Simon Davidmann (Synopsys)
[xx-xx--]           Peter Flake (Synopsys)
[xxxxxxx]           Joao Geada (Synopsys)
[xxx-xxx]           Ghassan Khoory (Synopsys, Co-Chair)
[xxxxx-x]           Andrzej Litwiniuk (Synopsys)
[---x-xx]           Alain Reynaud (Tensilica)
[x-----x]           Mike McNamara (Verisity)


Minutes: 

o Yatin explained that some emails were not forwarded by the email reflector 
because those emails came from a domains that the reflector did not recognize. 
Yatin will send the list of email addresses that the reflector has in its 
record. 

o The minutes of the last meeting (9/24) were approved. 

o Yatin clarified that the previous voting guidelines he sent was for 
increasing participation in the voting process. He has sent questions 
about this to Accellera's board and has not heard back from them. In 
absence of any clarification from the board, the guideline for 
eligibility for procedural voting would be
   - One company, one vote
   - Only Accellera member companies may vote. 
   - Attendance must be > 75 % or 3 out of last 4 meetings to vote.
This meant 4 companies could vote for DirectC donation: Cadence, 
Novas, Synopsys and Motorola. 


One more question was whether the attendance is counted on a per-member 
or per-company basis. Yatin said he will clarify this with the TCC.


o DirectC donation was accepted with 3 votes in favor and 1 against.

o In reply to Swapnajit's question, Yatin clarified that once accepted, 
a proposal for changing or enhancing a donation can be made by any member 
and the issue will be decided over vote. The donor will not have any 
particular privilege in deciding the changes. 

o Michael asked Yatin about the procedure going forward to keep track 
of the issues. Yatin replied that an action item will be opened for each 
issue that needs further discussion, it will be properly documented and 
will be slated for a vote if needed. 

o Kevin will synchronize with SV-EC on behalf of SV-CC regarding the 
pointer type variable.

o A face-to-face meeting of SV-CC has been tentatively scheduled on 
12th Nov in San Jose. Yatin will send out an email later.

o Joao presented the Assertion API donation. Some of the questions 
that came up were: 
   - Is it possible to access the individual expressions of an 
   assertion ? Joao answered this capability now exists. 

   - Is there a list of requirements for assertion API ? Yatin 
   said it was already there on the SV-CC web page. 

   - Does the assertion API provide mechanism to provide "near hits" ? 

   - Is there any dependency from the assertion API on the actual 
     language selected by the assertion API DWG? Joao said the only 
     dependency he sees is a set of enums defining the assertion states 
     that might need to be updated.

   - Kevin asked why System Verilog itself is not sufficient to 
   provide the capabilities that the assertion API is providing ? 
   The members decided to take the discussion offline over email 
   exchange. 

   - Ghassan proposed a vote on the donation of assertion API. Yatin will 
   send an email on eligibility. The email vote should be cast 
   by Monday (10/07) 6:00pm PST.