PAR scope and direction

Discuss the generic proposals for SJTAG
User avatar
Ian McIntosh
SJTAG Chair
Posts: 415
Joined: Mon Nov 05, 2007 11:49 pm
Location: Leonardo, UK
Contact:

Re: PAR scope and direction

Post by Ian McIntosh » Tue Jun 19, 2018 7:48 pm

Thanks Adam. "Transformations" still seems to be unexplained. Would it be better if the first enumerated point ended "... and of relevant data and protocol transformations"? (Is that a correct headline summary of what we mean by transformations?)
Ian McIntosh
Testability Lead
Leonardo MW Ltd.

User avatar
Adam W Ley
SJTAG Established Member
Posts: 33
Joined: Mon Nov 12, 2007 1:35 pm
Location: ASSET InterTech, Inc./ USA
Contact:

Re: PAR scope and direction

Post by Adam W Ley » Tue Jun 19, 2018 7:55 pm

Ian McIntosh wrote:
Tue Jun 19, 2018 7:48 pm
"Transformations" still seems to be unexplained. Would it be better if the first enumerated point ended "... and of relevant data and protocol transformations"? (Is that a correct headline summary of what we mean by transformations?)
I would be quite happy with additional qualification of "transformations" and would not object to your construction of such should others deem it suitable = I added the qualifier "relevant" so that there would be some bounds on "transformations", but I didn't feel that I had enough engagement with the topic to suggest specific bounds (as you have done).

Post Reply