Fwd: Latest Draft of ISO/IEC 15909 for comment

[Jonathan <jbil@crosswinds.net>]

Dear WG11 and Petri net experts,

This is just a reminder that today is the last day for comments on the 
final text for
FDIS of ISO/IEC 15909 (High-level Petri nets).

I have received official comment from Japan, stating they require no 
modifications. 
Dan Simpson (UK) did not require any modifications on a first read - but 
may get back to me.
Ekkart Kindler (Germany) was happy at a first glance, but was planning to 
get back to me when he had read it in detail.
Kjeld Mortensen (Denmark) has provided me with some detailed comments 
(all of an editorial nature I believe).

As yet, I have not had comment on the draft from
Tad Murata (USA), Jean Berube (Canada), Nisse Huisberg (Finland) or any 
one from France or Italy.

I would appreciates comments from you if possible.

Kind regards

Jonathan Billington
Editor ISO/IEC 15909
---------------- Begin Forwarded Message ----------------
Date:        28/10/00 18:07
Received:    30/10/00 20:53
From:        Jonathan, jbil@crosswinds.net
Reply-To:    PNX@informatik.hu-berlin.de
To:          PNX@informatik.hu-berlin.de
             jberube@ibm.net
             gin@tokyo.se.fujitsu.co.jp
             tadaumi@nttmhs.tnl.ntt.co.jp
             yabuta@tokyo.se.fujitsu.co.jp
             Dan.Simpson@bton.ac.uk
             hugh.davis@lineone.net
             kjensen@daimi.au.dk
             murata@eecs.uic.edu
             kindler@informatik.hu-berlin.de


Dear Members of WG11 and Petri net experts.

**This is an ISO copyright document, and can only be used for the purpose 
of commenting on the standards. Please do not distribute further.**

At last, I have what I believe to be very close to the final version of 
ISO/IEC 15909 High-level Petri Nets - Concepts, Definitions and Graphical 
Notation.

I have incorporated all of the comments from the FCD round, and have also 
picked up on some earlier comments, particularly from the UK (Dan 
Simpson) in order for the standard to be more consistent. This has meant 
introducing the notion of step in clause 7 for the HLPN Graph, as it was 
introduced in clause 5 (Semantic Model) but not followed through in 
clause 7. I am hoping that I have picked up most of the inconsistencies 
between the different parts, that got introduced with the changes - but 
please proof read carefully particularly clause 7 (7.4 and 7.5). I have 
also updated the Biblio, and arranged alphabetically. Are there any 
references that should be added? Many thanks to Mat Farrington, one of my 
PhD students for helping with a lot of mechanical processing in 
particular getting the figures consistent across the body of the standard 
and the tutorial, so that they have the same look and feel.

I would like to finalise this draft before December.
I therefore request that you send me your final comments on this by

18 November 2000. 

If I receive no comments by then I shall assume that you are happy with 
the current draft to be sent on to SC7/JTC1 for FDIS ballot.

Jean,

Please pass this draft FDIS version to anyone in WG11 I have missed.

Many thanks

Best wishes - Jonathan

	[[[ Attachment available via
	     http://www2.informatik.hu-berlin.de/top/PNX/pnstd-4.7.1.pdf
	]]]

-- pnx
[[ Post messages and replies:           
mailto:PNX@informatik.hu-berlin.de ]]
[[ World Wide Web URL:         
http://www2.informatik.hu-berlin.de/top/PNX/ ]]
[[ Archive URL:        
http://www2.informatik.hu-berlin.de/top/PNX/archive/ ]]


----------------- End Forwarded Message -----------------