Minutes of Weekly Meeting, 2011-02-28

Meeting called to order: 11:09 AM EST

1. Roll Call

Eric Cormack
Ian McIntosh
Peter Horwood
Brad Van Treuren
Brian Erickson
Heiko Ehrenberg (joined 11:10)
Tim Pender (joined 11:21)

Excused:
Patrick Au
Carl Walker
Adam Ley

2. Review and approve previous minutes:

02/21/2011 minutes:

  • Draft circulated on 02/21/2011.
  • No amendments noted.
  • Brian moved to approve, seconded by Eric, no objections or abstentions.

3. Review old action items

  • Adam proposed we cover the following at the next meeting:
    • Establish consensus on goals and constraints
    • What are we trying to achieve?
    • What restrictions are we faced with?
  • All: do we feel SJTAG is requiring a new test language to obtain the information needed for diagnostics or is STAPL/SVF sufficient? see also Gunnar's presentation, in particular the new information he'd be looking for in a test language
    (http://files.sjtag.org/Ericsson-Nov2006/STAPL-Ideas.pdf)
  • Ian/Brad: Condense gateway comments and queries into a concise set of questions. - Ongoing
  • All: Forward text file to Ian containing keywords from review of meeting minutes. - Ongoing.
  • Ian: Prepare draft of Newsletter and circulate for review during this week. - COMPLETE
  • All: Email suggestions for Newsletter items to Ian prior to the end of this week. - None Received - COMPLETE

4. Discussion Topics

    1. Newsletter
      - Final amendments and approval of draft
      • [Ian] I circulated a draft, but after Adam identified a few errors and some poor wording, I revised and recirculated it. Are there any comments regarding the revised draft?
      • [Eric] No, it looks good.
      • [Ian] Are there any last minute additions anyone would like to suggest?
      • [Eric] No. I think it's quite good at stating what we're trying to achieve this year.
      • [Ian] In that case I'll look for a motion to approve the newsletter for publication.
      • {Eric motioned to approve, seconded by Heiko. No objections or abstentions}
      • [Ian] I'll take an action to publish this as soon as I can. {ACTION}
    2. Identification of key "Take Away Points"
      - Progress on review of past minutes
      - Progress on preselection of keywords
      - Further thoughts on tooling
      • [Ian] Brad has managed to post his formatted takeaway list on the forums.
      • [Ian] During a rereading of some of the recent minutes I realized that it maybe wasn't too clear that I expected that posting of formatted takeaway points to keep going while we reviewed the keywords, so I sent out an email last week to clarify.
      • [Ian] We did agree to omit keywords for now though to limit any rework, although I noticed that Brad's post included keywords.
      • [Brad] Yes, I was about 80% done by the time we started talking about the keywords. I included them as suggestions.
      • [Ian] As far as the list of keywords is concerned, I know Carl had started on his activity, but I haven't received anything to merge in yet. So I've only the list that I was doing.
      • {Ian shared his keyword spreadsheet}
      • [Ian] What I found was that there was an awful lot of 'T's (toss) and very few definite Keeps. There were some 'Q's (question), not that many, and only a couple of 'D's (Don't know) that needed more research.
      • [Ian] If we had got all the inputs in then we'd be looking at a list of 1500 words to go through and even just to agree on the ones to toss would probably not be a good use of our time.
      • {Tim joined}
      • [Ian] I'd rather do a "review by exception", where we assume that the choice of toss or keep is correct unless someone objects, then we can concentrate on just the 'Q's and 'D's.
      • [Brad] It's a matter for people to voice any objections.
      • [Ian] But for that to work, everyone has to have the chance to review the sheet prior to the meeting.
      • [Brad] So this need to be something for next week. It's inefficient use of our time to review all the words in the meeting.
      • [Ian] The ideal, for me, would be to have all the contributions in by midweek so I can collate them and send them back round the group for review before the end of the working week. I know a lot of people don't have any time over the weekend or lose access to office email, etc., and looking at something like this in a few minutes on Monday morning isn't very useful.
      • [Brad] Ian, the correct version to work on was in your "ICT Disruption" email? I couldn't find it earlier, so I wasn't able to progress that.
      • [Ian] Yes that's the correct one. I've also sent you another copy, just in case you still can't find the original email.
      • [Ian] In going through my list of words, I did hit a few where I started to wonder again about the plurals.
      • [Brad] We agreed that we'd use the singular form only.
      • [Ian] But there were one or two examples that made me question that, but I probably won't be able to find them now!
      • [Ian] There are things like DSP that I thought ought to be in but other related words like DSPs or DSP's that would get merged to give you a total word frequency count.
      • [Brian] Running a search on DSP brings up DSP, DSPs and DSP's. I thought the reason for this was to come up with a list of search terms?
      • [Ian] Are you looking at the site search? Well, we've used the search terms from there to try to give us a head start on terms that we'd use to index our list of key takeaways, which would actually form a separate database.
      • [Ian] We're just trying to simplify the list of search terms. Actually, it's the data entry we're simplifying.
      • [Brian] OK, so we reduce the size of the keylist.
      • [Ian] Ah, I just found the example I was thinking of earlier: 'Diagnostic' where 'Diagnostics' seems more intuitive.
      • [Brad] But the user will have a finite list, so he can't make the mistake of entering the wrong term.
      • [Ian] You're right. I'm just getting hung up on things.
      • [Ian] I suppose I should ask if anyone else has managed to make any progress on their allocated blocks of minutes?
      • [Peter] I have to apologize, I've been completely swamped recently.
      • [Tim] It's been the same here.
      • [Ian] That's OK. The day job needs to go on.
      • [Ian] On the tooling side, I think Brad has only prepared a reader for the format so far?
      • [Brad] Yes a reader that can read in the formatted takeaways and insert into tables. I also was able to use the tool I mentioned to Ian to generate the SQL which should allow the database to be created elsewhere, such as in mySQL.
      • [Ian] And I should be able to paste that SQL query into the mySQL control panel to generate the data base.
      • [Brad] Ian have you tried running the SQL to see if it works on your database?
      • [Ian] Not yet. I felt it was maybe a bit too early. I did notice that it was a 192 line query, which will only get bigger as more rows are inserted into the tables.
      • [Brad] My library does not support mySQL.
      • [Ian] Looking ahead, my impression was that we'd set up a web form for the searches on our site. That way everyone can use the database.
      • [Brad] That was my idea as well.
      • [Heiko] I had a question regarding the formatted entries: Some of the meetings I looked at had no key takeaway - How do I represent that in the new format?
      • [Ian] Well, if there is no takeaway then just omit the record entirely. Keep it simple.
    3. White Paper
      - Volumes 1 and 2 are "stable": How do we progress Volumes 3 to 5?
      • [Ian] I wanted to have a quick think about how we move forward with the later volumes of the White Paper. Volumes 1 and 2 have been stable for some considerable, possibly even to the extent that we need to recheck them for relevance.
      • [Ian] Volume 4 only really had some sketchy outlines, and I'm not sure that we ever really put anything into Volume 5. Volume 3, Hardware, had some good content, but it was maybe more for the draft standard. We had been trying to get to the point of updating it.
      • [Eric] Yes that's what we had been doing.
      • [Brad] It was what spurred us on to doing the presentation with the building blocks.
      • [Ian] Is that presentation still the way that we see ourselves compiling the content for Volume 3?
      • [Brad] The presentation was a superset of what goes into Volume 3.
      • [Ian] Yes, for the graphics. We'd only use a few of those, but may need to rely on text to make up for some of the missing graphics.
      • [Brad] Some of the slides are covering all the way from the very basic through to advanced. I imagine that Volume 3 is for people that already know what SJTAG is, so we don't have to do all that explaining.
      • [Ian] OK, it's good for me to have a refresh on where we're going. It's easy to forget after putting something aside for a while.
      • [Ian] Volume 3 is probably our highest priority for completion. I think we have them in the right order for completion 3 then 4 then 5.
      • [Brad] I would agree with that.
      • [Ian] Some people might see the Business Case, Volume 5, as more important than some of the others in the end.
      • [Ian]Do we think we need to look back at Volumes 1 and 2?
      • [Brad] I've done some work on the Venn diagram. I didn't like so few things were showing linked to Reliability, so I've changed some of that. That would affect the Use Cases, but it'd be minor though.
      • [Ian] Do we actually show that Venn diagram in Volume 2?
      • [Eric] It's in Volume 1.
      • [Ian] Let's look at it soon, and we can see what it changes. It's easy enough to leaf an updated diagram into the wiki. It's the impact on accompanying text we need to look at.
      • [Ian] In conclusion, there's no change to the plan. We still pursue the Volumes in the order 3, 4 then 5, and we still want to use the Building Blocks presentation as the basis for Volume 3.

5. Key Takeaway for today's meeting

      • [Ian] To allow effective use of meeting time, I need to be able to circulate documents before the end of the preceding working week.

6. Schedule next meeting

Next Meeting:
March 7th

Schedule for March 2011:
14th, 21st, 28th.

Patrick will be unavailable until March 7th.

7. Any other business

None.

8. Review new action items

      • Ian: Publish the Newsletter as soon as possible.
      • Carl/Brad: Get annotated keyword worksheets to Ian by Wednesday Close of Business.
      • Ian: Recirculate collated keyword worksheet to group by Thursday Close of Business.

9. Adjourn

Brad moved to adjourn at 12:00 AM EST, seconded by Eric.

Respectfully submitted,
Ian McIntosh>