IEEE P1685 purpose and scope

[bob.beims@freescale.com]

DITA SIDSC participants;

As a follow up to today's teleconference, I was reviewing some IP-XACT information and ran across this web page:

http://www.eda-stds.org/spirit-p1685/

I'm wondering if the use of the term "documents" in the phrase "... for meta-data that documents the characteristics ..." might not be causing confusion.

From the perspective of an end-user of semiconductor devices, the meta-data captured in an IP-XACT file is *far* from what they would consider "documentation". IP-XACT files hold a basic *description*, yes, but nothing close to what an end-user needs in the way of procedural and functional *documentation* in order to use the device. At least that's my perspective.

This leads me to the conclusion that within the SIDSC we should definitely use the IP-XACT schema as *one of* the sources to guide our development of DITA elements. But we should be very careful to understand that IP-XACT is *not* a technical documentation standard, but is rather a *meda-data* standard.

A subtle difference, but an important one, in my opinion.

Thoughts?
Bob