Minutes of Weekly Meeting, 2012-01-30

Meeting called to order: 11:05 AM EST

1. Roll Call

Adam Ley
Brad Van Treuren
Brian Erickson
Carl Walker (left 11:29)
Eric Cormack
Heiko Ehrenberg
Tim Pender
Ian McIntosh
Harrison Miles (joined 11:31)

Excused:
Patrick Au
Richard Foster
Peter Horwood

2. Review and approve previous minutes:

01/23/2012 minutes:

  • Draft circulated on 01/23/2012.
  • Change 'fixe' to 'five' near the bottom of section 4a.
  • Brad moved to approve with the above amendment, 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)
  • Adam: will prepare a 1149.7 tutorial - COMPLETE
  • Ian: to pick a meeting date for that tutorial (Adam needs a few days advance notice) - COMPLETE
  • [Ian] Adam, when do you think you'd be able to offer the 1149.7 tutorial?
  • [Adam] I could do that pretty much anytime. I'd take a full session and maybe more.
  • [Ian] I'd suggest we set it up for next meeting?
  • [Eric] Please don't, I'd like to join the tutorial but I'm travelling on 6th and 13th.
  • [Ian] How about we do it on Feb 20th?
  • [Eric] Of course, I understand if the group decides to do the tutorial before then, I'd just not be able to join them. I don't want to hold things back.
  • [Ian] That's what I was wondering about. I realize from last week's minutes that you all felt you needed that tutorial before continuing.
  • [Tim] I think we agreed that we would get an advance copy of the tutorial for review.
  • [Adam] If it is desired I'd be prepared to provide the tutorial next week. I can offer Eric a one-on-one tutorial.
  • [Ian] That would be very good, thanks Adam!
  • [Adam] Eric and I can arrange offline.
  • [Ian] OK, we'll set up the first session of the tutorial for Feb 6th.

4. Discussion Topics

  1. Q1 2012 Newsletter
    • [Ian] I, rather quickly, threw together a draft newsletter over the weekend. I'm not sure that I captured all the suggestions from the last meeting.
    • {Ian shared the newsletter}
    • [Ian] I think there was a suggestion of linking to a forum discussion?
    • [Heiko] Yes, we thought to maybe set up a thread with a link from the newsletter; create a thread where people could post their ideas. Or just email back.
    • [Ian] Yes, that's OK for this group, but for others the reply address on the newsletter is probably just news(at)sjtag.org, which doesn't get read. So I think the forum is better, if we can get people to use it.
    • {Forum shared}
    • [Ian] I guess this could go in either 'Weekly Meetings' or 'SJTAG General Discussions'?
    • [Brad] I'd suggest the General Discussions is better.
    • [Ian] that makes sense.
    • {Ian created new thread: 2-Wire Topologies (1149.7) within SJTAG Systems http://forums.sjtag.org/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=158}
    • {Edit view of newsletter shared, link inserted}
    • [Ian] Are there any other changes?
    • {Heiko noted a few small corrections; Ian edited and previewed these}
    • [Tim] If you take a quick glance at the 2-wire topology section, and you don't read it but just look at the picture, you are wondering where in the graphic the 2-wire topology comes into play!
    • [Ian] Well, at this point we don't really have any good diagrams for this.
    • [Tim] Right, perhaps just adding a sentence to explain would be helpful.
    • [Ian] OK, how about adding a sentence to the end of the second paragraph?
    • [Brad] As good a place as any, I think.
    • {Ian added a note referring to the drawing}
    • {Carl Walker had to leave the meeting}
    • [Ian] The picture from ITC is the best I could find on my camera of the conference itself. That 'From the Chair' section maybe doesn't really say much; it's just a brief note on ITC.
    • [Eric] Well it notes that the process is rolling again and that papers need to be going in.
    • {Harrison Miles joined}
    • [Ian] We've only got those two articles this time.
    • [Brad] I think that's all we can present for this quarter.
  2. Arrangements for reaffirmation of officers
    • [Ian] This is an annual process, now. Given that we've already booked the 6th for Adam's material, we're probably looking at 13th or 20th.
    • [Ian] First, let's see about availability of the current officers.
    • [Heiko] I'd be happy to resign as vice chair if anyone else wants to take on that role, but I would also be willing to remain as vice chair.
    • [Ian] I would say pretty much the same about my role as chair. If anyone wants to take a stab at it, I would not stand in their way.
    • [Ian] One thing I'd like to put on the table is the need for sharing the minute-taking. That is a very time consuming process and I’m having problems finding the time. I did mention this briefly to both Heiko and Brad before today's meeting.
    • [Ian] We have a vacant Secretary/Editor role, but I am aware that the weekly not taking can be a bit of a grind so I'd also suggest the possibility of sharing that responsibility between a few folks.
    • [Brad] We also discussed that we may want to change the format of minutes to make it more brief, focusing on the main takeaways and discussion points and not following the dialog format so much.
    • [Ian] I have to say that I've been quite pleased by the narrative form that started under Brad: It probably helps those who are coming in 'cold', but I don't how many people that really is.
    • [Ian] To allow Eric to be present, I'd suggest that we run the formal reaffirmation on February 20th, unless anyone else knows of difficulties with that date. I'd like to have the best attendance possible.
    • [Brad] I don't think there's a set timescale on this.
    • [Ian] Not really. We did this in January last year. Having it at the beginning of the year made it easier to remember to do it. I think I'd prefer not to go beyond February though.
    • [Brad] I'd agree.
    • [Ian] It gives people a little to consider if they'd like to take the Secretary/Editor role.
    • [Tim] Editor sounds better than Secretary.
    • [Ian] Yes, I think the editor role is really one for post-PAR when you need someone to pull together the draft standard.
    • [Brad] In our informal position we can bend the rules and have maybe three people take notes; that reduces the time it take to assemble the notes. And a team effort means that someone else can pick up the logging if you want to join in the discussion.
    • [Brad] One of the problems I had was taking the notes and participating in the discussions.
    • [Ian] I'd agree with that. Often I miss parts of the discussion while I'm trying to make notes on the preceding comments.
    • [Brian] Does Webex have a record feature that could be used for the minutes?
    • [Ian] I don't know who has access to the recording afterwards; I suspect it is only the host, which might not be a big help.
    • [Brian] Perhaps we can try it out with Adam's presentation next week.
    • [Brad] Also, what I found on the occasions that I tried transcribing the minutes from a recording I ended up spending even more time on writing the minutes.
    • [Ian] Yes, from what I remember of converting the notes into HTML for the website at that time, notes that were typically 14-15kB grew to 47kB or so when the recording was used. I think there's a tendency to transcribe every comment rather than paraphrase.
    • [Tim] Just get everyone to talk concisely!
    • [Eric] If you look, the Record button in Webex is greyed out.
    • [Ian] No, I have an active Record button.
    • [Eric] So it goes with whoever has the bubble?
    • [Ian] More likely it's because I've been given the host role, which is really Carl's. We can try the recording and see what happens.
    • [Heiko] I'm willing to take some notes but they won't be as detailed as either Brad's or Ian's.
    • [Brad] I liked Jeff Rearick's notes from P1687 meetings; they're just a brief summary but where there was some specific discussion he'd include quotes to show who the players were.
    • [Ian] That impressive because as you take the notes how do you know what's going to become important?
    • [Brad] I think he just has a really good memory!
  3. Extending the Primitives descriptions to address 2-wire topologies
    - Continue from last week; 5 slides from Brad still to be discussed
    • {Deferred to a future meeting}

5. Key Takeaway for today's meeting

None.

6. Schedule next meeting

Next Meetings:
6th February - Eric will be absent
13th February - Eric will be absent
20th February
27th February

7. Any other business

None.

8. Review new action items

None.

9. Adjourn

Brad moved to adjourn at 11:54 AM EST, seconded by Eric.

Thanks to Heiko for providing additional notes from today's meeting.

Respectfully submitted,
Ian McIntosh