Re: Re[2]: Connector spec swathing

Gus,

(IMHO) I think this is another case of the users and the spec writers having
different perspectives.

The users assume that whomever wrote the spec must have had some idea in mind
on how the swath would be converted to a full matrix, otherwise the spec
hasn't been well thought out. (Meaning that if the spec writer doesn't know
how to do it, what makes them think anyone does?) The users go on to think
that as long as the spec writer has this underlying scheme, why not publish
the scheme to reduce misunderstandings.

The spec writer, on the other hand, is trying not to restrict the
implementation to what they had in mind since someone else might have an
equally clever, yet completely different way of doing it.

This came up before on discussions of some of the BIRDS for specifying changes
in delay values based upon slope and over shoot of input voltages. Bob Ross
ended up saying that he would probably implement the scheme differently than
the spec writer, but would like to know what the spec writer had in mind if
for no other reason than to prove that it could be done.

Keep up the good work,
Matthew Flora

----- Original Message -----
From: <apanella@molex.com>
To: "chris" <chris_reid@mentorg.com>
Cc: "Mike LaBonte" <mikelabonte@cadence.com>; "IBIS Mailing list"
<ibis@eda.org>
Sent: Wednesday, June 14, 2000 9:27 AM
Subject: Re[2]: Connector spec swathing

>
> So then, the recommendation would be to have the IBIS Connector Model
> Specification _explicitly_ state how each simulator will implement the
expansion
> from the keywords and parameters already given in the specification.
>
> If the recommendation is acceptable (it is for me)... Would it be
acceptable by
> the simulator companies? If not.. is there a different option?
>
> In the discussion of this topic in the subcommittee, I got the impression
that
> the expansion method of matrices was somewhat seen as a proprietary
technology.
> As such, I wanted to build in enough keywords and usage rules that would
allow
> me to assign values that would _lessen_ the likelihood of incorrect
simulator
> implementation (assuming of course that I correctly defined the model,
swath
> size, and related keywords...)
>
> I will take this up at our next IBIS Connector Model subcommittee
> teleconference.
>
> _gus: 630-527-4617
Received on Wed Jun 14 10:37:48 2000