****************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************** BIRD ID#: 101 ISSUE TITLE: Section 6b, Figure 12 Example Note REQUESTER: Bob Ross, Teraspeed Consulting Group DATE SUBMITTED: December 1, 2005 DATE REVISED: DATE ACCEPTED BY IBIS OPEN FORUM: January 6, 2006 ****************************************************************************** ****************************************************************************** STATEMENT OF THE ISSUE: IBIS Version 4.1, Figure 12 in Section 6b shows a package which implies a format such as ICM which has not yet been defined. Specifically, the connections other than one-to-one from pin to pad are not yet defined. ****************************************************************************** STATEMENT OF THE RESOLVED SPECIFICATIONS: Insert a temporary note to alert the reader that Figure 12 is shown for reference, but is not fully supported in the next official release of IBIS. Under the [Circuit Call], [End Circuit Call] keyword "Examples:" heading, insert this super note: | NOTE REGARDING THIS EXAMPLE: | The pad_* to pin connections in Figure 12 and in the example | lines with the comment, "explicit pad connection", are shown for | reference. The connection syntax has not yet been defined. | Therefore, the connections for pad_* to pin are not supported | in this specification. | ****************************************************************************** ANALYSIS PATH/DATA THAT LED TO SPECIFICATION Figure 12 documents pad_* to pin connections that assume an extended package model such as defined by ICM. The linkages involve some careful consideration which will take time to resolve. Since such linkages are not defined, and since the IBIS file functions in a stand-alone mode, this portion of the example is not supported. It is impossible to determine if this syntax is intended for an extended package model or if this is simply a port name error in the file. The ibischk4 parser treats these cases in the Figure 12 example as an error. The connection involves an ICM linkage under consideration, but several choices exist regarding how to do this which will take time to resolve. So the intended connecton capability is shown, but officially disallowed in this release of the specification by adding the extended note. This note would be removed when the connection syntax is documented. The alternative would be to revise the example and edit out all unsupported text. Since this involves significant revision, and much of the text would likely be re-inserted in the future, the super note option is selected. It effectively revises the specification in the same manner. **************************************************************************** ANY OTHER BACKGROUND INFORMATION: ******************************************************************************