HIGHLIGHTS of the March 1997 ASISWG/ASISRG Meeting

There has been much exciting activity regarding ASIS recently. Please find enclosed the highlights from the ASIS Balloting process and the actions at the ASISWG/ASISRG meeting held in Phoenix, Arizona from 25-26 March 1997.

  1. ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22 WG9 balloting for the ASIS specification was conducted from 1 January 1997 to 11 March 1997. The Ballot results are: Germany, Japan, Russia, Switzerland, the United Kingdom, and the United States have provided Affirmative Ballots; Sweden Abstained; there were no Negative Ballots. The balloting process generated 88 editorial comments and 46 technical comments. These must be addressed in an official Disposition of Comments document to be delivered to WG9 by 1 May 1997. Should WG9 concur with the disposition of comments, then WG9 will forward the revised ASIS specification to SC22 for Registration as an ISO Committee Draft (CD).

  2. The editorial and technical comments were addressed at the ASISWG/ASISRG meeting in Phoenix. The comments in general were excellent and represented a thorough review by the Nations. The Ada Joint Program Office (AJPO) conducted two technical reviews and provided comments via the National Ballot of the United States. The ASIS Meeting was highly productive as all comments were addressed with resolutions we believe will be satisfactory to WG9. Of the 88 editorial comments, 85 were accepted; of the 46 technical comments, 38 were accepted. The general approach for resolving each accepted comment was agreed. Several comments resulted in action items. Technical and editorial comments are available on the ASIS Home Page. A draft disposition for each comment will be available soon, with the completed Disposition of Comments and updated ASIS specification available by 1 May 1997. The ASIS Home Page is =>

    http://www.acm.org/sigada/wg/asiswg

  3. One of the inputs to the ASIS Balloting process was: "we do not have any companies directly involved in tool construction". This response was an extremely valuable wakeup call to us, as we have not been effective in getting the word out on why ASIS is valuable to the application developer. ASIS is of special value to the application developer as ASIS allows the developer to rapidly build tools for special analysis of Ada code for a variety of purposes. It allows one to Roll-Your-Own analysis tools. ASIS is a very powerful capability fulfilling many needs of the Ada development community. It was noted that Boeing and MITRE, application developers present at the meeting, have been significant ASIS users. We agreed to highlight the "Roll-Your-Own" tool capability at STC, WAdaS, Ada-Europe, and TriAda.

  4. The ASIS specification is now in the hands of ISO. This means we are no longer able to make updates or changes. All future changes must be the result of National comments generated through the balloting process at SC22 or JTC1. We did agree to keep track of desired changes. Those changes viewed as necessary would require us to convince a National Representative to include them as part of their balloting process. This is the only way we can effect future changes to the ASIS specification. Thus, the ASIS specification is now hard to change; any changes must be thoroughly coordinated and documented.

  5. ASIS providers present viewed the new stability of ASIS to be a good thing. Each provider could implement the Committee Draft ASIS interface to the now stable baseline instead of the moving baseline. All ASIS providers were encouraged to update their implementations to the soon to be available ASIS 2.0.M (the ASIS CD Version) for demonstrations and presentations at Tri-Ada'97 in November 1997. We hope to be able to demonstrate then that tools developed for one Ada environment will easily port to all other Ada environments supported by ASIS.

  6. We would like to thank DDC-I for hosting a very productive and important meeting in the life of ASIS. We thank the National reviewers who provided excellent comments which will result in a significantly improved ASIS specification for the Ada community. We would also like to thank those who helped resolve the comments both by email and at the ASISWG/ASISRG meeting. These reviewers and resolvers included: John Barnes, Steve Blake, Dan Cooper, John Dawes, Robert Dewar, Dan Ehrenfried, Magnus Ericson, Herm Fischer, Peter Hermann, Rick Hudson, Kiyoshi Ishihata, Jesper Joergensen, Bjorn Kallberg, Alain Le Guennec, Ole Oest, Michael Pickett, Erhard Ploedereder, Ron Price, Clyde Roby, Sergey Rybin, Steen Silberg, Doug Smith, Alfred Strohmeier, Joyce Tokar, Bill Thomas, and Kevin Tucker.

    v/r
    Currie Colket
    Chairman, ASISWG / Chairman, ASISRG
    Colket@ACM.Org
    Phone: +1 (703) 602-1483; FAX: +1 (703) 602-1553


    [Up] [SIGAda] [ACM]

    Last update 9 July 1997. Questions, comments to Clyde Roby (CRoby@IDA.Org)