[ibis-quality] Re: one liners for error checklist
- From: Bob Ross <bob@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: ibis-quality@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2004 10:21:19 -0700
Eckhard and All:
I agree, we need to make the check off consistent with compliance,
not with failure.
However, the titles need to be cast in a positive manner rather
than in a negative manner. Here are some suggestions:
Revised( from error list )
5.1 LEVEL 0 Typ/min/max order of parameters correct
5.2 LEVEL 1 C_comp typ/min/max values consider both Input and I/O modes
5.3 LEVEL 0 First/last point of waveforms equal to V_fixture values
5.4 LEVEL 1 Enough points in waveform or small time-step in waveforms
5.5 LEVEL 1 Minimize waveform lead-in-time
5.6 LEVEL 1 Open_sink/Open_source model with correct Vref, Cref, Rref,
Vmeas
5.7 LEVEL 1 Differential models with waveforms
5.8 LEVEL 1 Models correspond to data sheet
5.9 LEVEL 0 Correct model type
5.1 LEVEL 0 Consistency of waveform table
5.11 LEVEL 1 Open_sink/Open_source model not push-pull
5.12 LEVEL 1 Package pins inserted
(change 5.1 to 5.10 in table)
-------------------------------------------------------
Eckhards suggestions:
old ( from error list )
5.1 LEVEL 0 typ/min/max swizzles of parameters
5.2 LEVEL 1 C_comp same value for in and io
5.3 LEVEL 0 First/last point of waveforms not equal to V_fixture values
5.4 LEVEL 1 Too few points in waveform or time-step in waveforms too big
5.5 LEVEL 1 Minimize waveform lead-in-time
5.6 LEVEL 1 Open-sink model with different Vref,Cref,Rref,Vmeas
5.7 LEVEL 1 Differential models without waveforms
5.8 LEVEL 1 Fewer models than in data sheet
5.9 LEVEL 0 Wrong model type
5.1 LEVEL 0 Inconsistency of waveform table
5.11 LEVEL 1 Open-sink model modeled/measured as push-pull
5.12 LEVEL 1 Package pins missing
new ( negative logic to make the tick )
5.1 LEVEL 0 no typ/min/max swizzles of parameters
5.2 LEVEL 1 C_comp not same value for in and io
5.3 LEVEL 0 First/last point of waveforms are equal to V_fixture values
5.4 LEVEL 1 enough points in waveform or time-step in waveforms too big
5.5 LEVEL 1 Minimized waveform lead-in-time
5.6 LEVEL 1 Open-sink model with different Vref,Cref,Rref,Vmeas
5.7 LEVEL 1 Differential models with waveforms
5.8 LEVEL 1 not Fewer models than in data sheet
5.9 LEVEL 0 no Wrong model type
5.1 LEVEL 0 no Inconsistency of waveform table
5.11 LEVEL 1 Open-sink model not modeled/measured as push-pull
5.12 LEVEL 1 no Package pins missing
---------------
Bob
Lenski Eckhard wrote:
Hello all,
as we talked yesterday, I resend my attachment concerning the one-liners for
the error-section
I see a difference between the titles in the error section and the
one-liners from it that appears in the checklist
I think in the one-liners the description should change
( it's something like positive negative logic )
example:
error list :
typ/min/max swizzles of parameters
one-liner should be :
no min/typ/max swizzles
<<one-liners-for-errors-checklist.xls>>
I tried to change it for all problems in the attached excel-sheet
regards
Eckhard
==================================================
Eckhard Lenski Phone: 0049 89 722 27776
Siemens AG Fax : 0049 89 722 26879
Email: eckhard.lenski@xxxxxxxxxxx
ICN M&L TDC TC3
Hofmannstr. 51
81359 München
Germany
==================================================
--
Bob Ross
Teraspeed Consulting Group LLC Teraspeed Labs
121 North River Drive 13610 SW Harness Lane
Narragansett, RI 02882 Beaverton, OR 97008
503-750-6481 503-430-1065
http://www.teraspeed.com 503-246-8048 Direct
bob@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
---------------------------------------------------------------------
IBIS Quality website: http://www.sisoft.com/ibis-quality
IBIS Quality archives: //www.freelists.org/archives/ibis-quality
To unsubscribe send an email:
To: ibis-quality-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: unsubscribe
Other related posts:
