This message is from the T13 list server.
Dan,
I also recieved an off-board response from someone reminding me that
this is similar to what occurred many years ago when T13 adopted the ATAPI
portion of the specification. I am someone who understands the word
autonomous extremely well. T13 and SWG are autonomous organizations and are
not bound to each other in anyway. My reasons for bringing this up are as I
said simple. If you look at the original ATA-1 specification and you look
at ATA/ATAPI-7 they don't even resemble the same document. All though there
are no plans for anyone in T13 to make changes to SWG's designs today or
tomorrow, years down the road there will be reasons (ie, some of the current
issues I see already being brought up about incompatibilities). T13 has
always been able to make these changes at committee level without requiring
aproval from another organization or someone being able to say, "no, the T13
spec is incorrect, here is the real one" or, "well, we designed to the real
specification and it works fine if you follow ours, T13 must be wrong".
Believe me, I think its the greatest thing in the world that in the last
several years no matter whos hard drive I purchased (and this holds true for
all ATA/ATAPI devices as well), I can plug in into my computer and it works.
I know there are exceptions to this but for the most part this is true. I
would hope we can maintain this high standard in our industry.
Gary Laatsch
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
----- Original Message -----
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, November 05, 2003 10:55 AM
Subject: Re: [t13] RE: SWG - T13 relationship.
> This message is from the T13 list server.
>
>
> Gary,
>
> My understanding is that the T13 committee was allowed to incorporate
> copyrighted material produced by the SATA working group organization into
> the SATA proposal for the ATA/ATAPI-7 project. We made a good faith
> commitment to avoid gratuitous technical changes in the SATA proposal,
> which I believe we have honored. I hope we never make unnecessary changes
> in proposals. Our policy has and will remain to be that we will consider
> all proposals from our members and dispose of them as the committee sees
> fit.
>
> We want to maintain good relations with other organizations in the
> industry and avoid conflict where possible. I hope T13 receives proposals
> for new features for ATA/ATAPI-8 from many groups and organizations
> including the SATA II Working Group. Of course, I do not want people to
> discuss information that is under NDA on our reflector or at our meetings.
>
>
> T13 receives proposals, considers them, and adopts or rejects them by vote
> of the members. We make changes to our draft documents by vote of the
> members. If our members vote in contradiction of some other groups' wishes
> the vote is what it is, but I expect the members to take all information
> into consideration during votes including how it impacts their firm and
> the organizations in which their firm participates.
>
>
> Best Regards,
> Daniel J. Colegrove
> Hitachi Global Storage Technologies
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> (702) 614-6119
> ----- Forwarded by Daniel Colegrove/US/HGST on 11/05/2003 08:00 AM -----
>
>
> "Gary Laatsch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 11/04/2003 10:45 AM
>
>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> cc:
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [t13] RE: SWG - T13 relationship.
>
>
>
>
> This message is from the T13 list server.
>
>
> The reason I asked the question I did was very simple really.
>
> I will try to create a scenario of why I asked the question, please
> correct
> me if I am off base or do not have the legal expertise for asking the
> question I did....
>
> In ATAPI specifications, if the committee decides to obsolete a command
> and
> takes a vote at committee level and the vote to obsolete passes, the
> specification is changed. No other approvals are needed since T13 is
> supposed to be represative of the storage community. Before the final
> specification is appoved however, it is put out to the public for comments
> and all of those need to be addressed before it is submitted to ANSI (in a
> nutshell, I am summarizing a bit).
>
> If SATA-2 specific details (which I thought were being considered for
> inclusion, I could be wrong right here and this could be the basis of the
> confusion) are included in the next generation of specifications, will T13
> be able to make the same changes and or decisions down the road without
> first getting approval from the SWG?
>
> Maybe I misunderstand the charter of T13, wouldn't be the first time.
>
> Gary Laatsch
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Tuesday, November 04, 2003 8:30 AM
> Subject: [t13] RE: SWG - T13 relationship.
>
>
> > This message is from the T13 list server.
> >
> >
> >
> > My apologies to all for misunderstanding the arrangement.
> > I was wrong wrong wrong.
> >
> > Thank You !!!
> > -----------------------------------------------------------------
> > Jim Hatfield
> > ATA Interface Firmware & T13 (ATA/ATAPI) Standards Representative
> > Seagate Technology - PSG
> > e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > s-mail: 389 Disc Drive; Longmont, CO 80503 USA
> > voice: 720-684-2120
> > fax : 720-684-2711
> > ====================================================
> >
> >
> > |---------+---------------------------->
> > | | "Grimsrud, Knut |
> > | | S" |
> > | | <knut.s.grimsrud@|
> > | | intel.com> |
> > | | No Phone Info |
> > | | Available |
> > | | |
> > | | 11/03/2003 04:31 |
> > | | PM |
> > | | |
> > |---------+---------------------------->
> >
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------------
> ---------------------------------------------------|
> > |
> |
> > | To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> |
> > | cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> |
> > | Subject: RE: SWG - T13 relationship.
> |
> >
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------------
> ---------------------------------------------------|
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > I'm not sure I understand what the underlying issue is that is raising
> > this, and I suspect that folks that may not have expertise in the legal
> > area may be causing undue confusion.
> >
> > I believe the industry benefits from avoiding two different flavors of
> > the SATA technology that are not interchangeable, and therefore suggest
> > that technical work done in either the T13 or SATA communities see some
> > coordination. To that effect, the SATA community has been submitting
> > materials to T13 on work that SATA is doing that can impact the T13
> > document (for example errata identified and addressed, etc). Some of the
> > stuff we send T13 is in early stages to provide advance notice (for
> > example the latching cable assembly solution which was provided as
> > advance notice before it was completed).
> >
> > I would hope that T13 exercise a similar discipline in advancing the
> > technology in order to avoid two different favors of the technology
> > resulting. I'm not aware of any legal obligation to do so, but suspect
> > it would be generally good for the storage industry.
> >
> > Knut
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> > Sent: Monday, November 03, 2003 3:26 PM
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Grimsrud, Knut S
> > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: SWG - T13 relationship.
> >
> > Hey, guys !!!
> >
> > Could either of you comment on the 'legal basis' for making or not
> > making
> > technical
> > changes to SATA 1.0a content in ATA/ATAPI-7 ?
> >
> > The copyright release wording is exceptionally vague.
> >
> > Thank You !!!
> > -----------------------------------------------------------------
> > Jim Hatfield
> > ATA Interface Firmware & T13 (ATA/ATAPI) Standards Representative
> > Seagate Technology - PSG
> > e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > s-mail: 389 Disc Drive; Longmont, CO 80503 USA
> > voice: 720-684-2120
> > fax : 720-684-2711
> > ====================================================
> > ----- Forwarded by James C Hatfield/Seagate on 11/03/2003 04:22 PM -----
> > |---------+---------------------------->
> > | | Larry Barras |
> > | | <[EMAIL PROTECTED]|
> > | | > |
> > | | No Phone Info |
> > | | Available |
> > | | |
> > | | 11/03/2003 04:01 |
> > | | PM |
> > | | |
> > |---------+---------------------------->
> >
> > >-----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > -------------------------------------------------------|
> > |
> > |
> > | To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > |
> > | cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > |
> > | Subject: SWG - T13 relationship.
> > |
> >
> > >-----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > -------------------------------------------------------|
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > I'm not aware of such restrictions on T13 changing technical
> > information in the SATA material. At least none written on paper that
> > I can find.
> >
> > If there is such a condition, please indicate the document where that
> > condition is stipulated.
> >
> > This does not seem to be the case, as we did incorporate new material
> > into ATA-7 volume 3 for ATAPI devices on Serial ATA interfaces. Ref
> > E03132r2.
> >
> > So far the effort has been cooperative between the SATA working group
> > and T13 and seems to be working well. T13 is not a good place to
> > develop new technology, but it is a good place to maintain and
> > document a technology, with maintenance being an active thing.
> >
> > I do not believe that SATA working group "approval" is required for
> > anything T13 does. However a cooperating relationship exists and
> > that's a good thing.
> >
> > If this is not the case, I'd like to have that spelled out.
> >
> > At 9:43 AM -0700 11/3/03, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > >This message is from the T13 list server.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >There is no 'serial atapi' proposal. I merely recorded the fact that
> > >questions about
> > >ATAPI via the Serial ATA interface are starting to surface more
> > frequently
> > >on the
> > >reflector and elsewhere.
> > >
> > >T13 has a copyright release from the SATA working group, but is not
> > 'free'
> > >to change
> > >technical content, but is allowed to consider clarifications.
> > >
> > >The T13 liason to the SATA working group (Dan Colgrove) does ask the
> > SATA
> > >working
> > >group for approval on some items, and the T13 members who are also SATA
> > >working group
> > >members have feedback in both groups.
> > >
> > >Thank You !!!
> > >-----------------------------------------------------------------
> > >Jim Hatfield
> > >ATA Interface Firmware & T13 (ATA/ATAPI) Standards Representative
> > >Seagate Technology - PSG
> > > e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > s-mail: 389 Disc Drive; Longmont, CO 80503 USA
> > > voice: 720-684-2120
> > > fax : 720-684-2711
> > >====================================================
> > >
> > >
> > >|---------+---------------------------->
> > >| | "Gary Laatsch" |
> > >| | <[EMAIL PROTECTED]|
> > >| | ell.net> |
> > >| | Sent by: |
> > >| | [EMAIL PROTECTED]|
> > >| | rg |
> > >| | No Phone Info |
> > >| | Available |
> > >| | |
> > >| | 11/01/2003 10:55 |
> > >| | AM |
> > >| | |
> > >|---------+---------------------------->
> > >
> > >>
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > ------------------------------------------------------|
> >
> > > |
> > >|
> > > | To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > >|
> > > | cc:
> > >|
> > > | Subject: Re: [t13] ATA/ATAPI-8 suggestions list
> > >|
> > >
> > >>
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > ------------------------------------------------------|
> >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >This message is from the T13 list server.
> > >
> > >
> > >I haven't looked at the meeting minutes to see what discussions may or
> > may
> > >not have occurred (the minutes are usually just general anyway), but
> > just
> > >curious:
> > >
> > >If there is a Serial ATAPI proposal (and SATA-2 would fall into this
> > >question as well) and is being considered for inclusion in ATAPI-8, I
> > will
> > >ask the same question I asked before we decided to include SATA 1.0.
> > >
> > > Will T13 be allowed to add, delete or modify everything in this
> > area
> > >without first getting approval from the Serail ATA committee? Although
> > >this
> > >was answered "yes" for SATA 1.0, I don't believe (my opinion) that it's
> > >true.
> > >
> > >my $0.02,
> > >
> > >Gary Laatsch
> > >[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >
> > >
> > >----- Original Message -----
> > >From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > >To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > >Sent: Friday, October 24, 2003 2:03 PM
> > >Subject: [t13] ATA/ATAPI-8 suggestions list (resend)
> > >
> > >
> > >> This message is from the T13 list server.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> Here is a list of possible subjects for ATA/ATAPI-8 to consider.
> > >>
> > >> These are mostly gleaned from the outstanding issues list and from
> > >comments
> > >> made at this week's October 2003 plenary meeting.
> > >>
> > >> These are not necessarily for discussion at this time. I am just
> > 'priming
> > >> the pump'
> > >> for others to add other suggestions to the list for December when we
> > >submit
> > >> a proposal
> > >> for an ATA/ATAPI-8 project.
> > >> -----------------------------
> > >> * Serial ATA
> > >> - external interface (connectors, electrical, etc.)
> > >> - serial ATAPI
> > >> - LED
> > >> - various issues involving bridges
> > >> e03132r1 - ATAPI DMA Direction issues Proposal
> > >> - incorporation of SATA 1.0a errata
> > >> - incorporation of SATA-2 new features (native command
> > queuing,
> > >etc.)
> > >>
> > >> * (e03138r0) Enterprise Extensions Smart Accessed (EESA)
> > >>
> > >> * (e02126r1) Write Wrong Proposal
> > >>
> > >> * ISO standardization
> > >>
> > >> * and some large questions to consider:
> > >> - should support for PIO be dropped ?
> > >> - should ATA/ATAPI-8 be the final standard to include parallel
> > ATA
> > >?
> > >> - redo command volume to be interface-agnostic ?
> > >> - redo command volume to be FIS-based ?
> > >>
> > >> Thank You !!!
> > >> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> > >> Jim Hatfield
> > >> ATA Interface Firmware & T13 (ATA/ATAPI) Standards Representative
> > >> Seagate Technology - PSG
> > >> e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >> s-mail: 389 Disc Drive; Longmont, CO 80503 USA
> > >> voice: 720-684-2120
> > >> fax : 720-684-2711
> > >> ====================================================
> > >>
> > >>
> >
> >
> > --
> >
> > ---------------------
> > I make stuff go.
> > ---------------------
> >
> > Larry Barras
> > Apple Computer Inc.
> > 1 Infinite Loop
> > MS: 306-2TC
> > Cupertino, CA 95014
> > (408) 974-3220
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
