Participants

     Jim Felty
     Don Organ
     Francisco Hernadez
     Ernie Wahl
     Spass Stoiantschewski
 
 

Discussion topics:

  1. Should the STILA testflow:
       1. represent an entire test program ?
       2. be a database from which to generate a test program ?
     Ernie - differences include completeness of information - i.e. to load onto a tester may require
additional
     information about tester configurations, also issues such as scoping of variables and other
information. Also
     load-time information, calibration, etc.
     Spass - I see this two as being somewhat in conflict.  Test Program generation has much more lax
rules - not
     everything needs to be defined.
     Don - I'm very concerned if we do anything that precludes me using this as a test program.
      Spass - (b) (database) is a subset of (a) (entire test program)

     Decision - the STILA4 file is a (possibly incomplete) representation of a test program.
     It may be interpretted either by a test program generator  or by the tester operating system. Either
will add (dd
     tester-specific information and resolve loading, calibration, operator-interface, etc. issue).

  2. Should we use the inheritance hierarchy from:
       1. Envision ?
       2. TPG3 ?
       3. some combination ?
     Let's limit our focus from what happens between when the Test button is hit, until the bin-out
occurs.

     We discussed numerous differences - these boil down into the execution model.
 

We scheduled our next conference call for Thursday 8/6 at 12noon PDT, 3pm EDT. Francisco will
host.
 

-DVO-
 

--
==============================================
Don Organ   (408) 383-2518   don_organ@ltx.com
LTX Corp. 3930 N. First St. San Jose, CA 95134
==============================================