SAM public review comment

Charles Monia monia at am.shrmsg.shr.MTS.dec.com
Tue Apr 18 14:13:07 PDT 1995


Hi Rod:

Thanks for your comments.

You wrote in part:

|I, too was confused by this. As the tasks are numbered in the order
|received, though, I think even a simple text modification might solve
|the problem. Change note 1 to read:

|1) Head of Queue task 3, received as a Head of Queue task, is in the
|enabled state. Simple tasks 1 and 2, received and already enabled when
|Head of Queue task 3 was received, remain enabled. Tasks 4,5 and 6 are
|dormant, as they were received after Head of Queue task 3, and
|therefore must wait for it to end.

|This is a little long, and does have the disadvantage of describing
|state 1 in terms of actions rather than its static state; perhaps
|you're right that another head of queue example would help.

I hope than an additional example will clarify matters. I lean towards using a
combination of
text and graphics to show what's going on.

|Perhaps if you entered 3 and 7 into the _bottom_ of the set of enabled
|tasks, rather than the _top_, it would be a little clearer that it
|simply expedites joining the set of enabled tasks.

While I see your point, I'm a little uncomfortable with showing Head of Queue
tasks at some position other than towards the top of the list.

|One other objection I have to the state diagrams is that you show
|transitions such as "task 2 ended, task 7 created" and "tasks 7, 4 and
|6 ended". This implies that a single state change can represent
|changes to multiple tasks, when in truth this is a _series_ of state
|changes.

I agree with your comment and will propose a change to correct the problem.

Charles Monia





More information about the T10 mailing list