Hi all, Thanks to all for the comments and the feedback. I tried to include all comments (more detailed responses summarized below). Attached are the final slides that I will send to Rich. Martin Marc-Andre:
I think the slides are too full. Maybe I am missing what the BoF session is for. Am I correct that it is meant to reach out beyond the Forum?
I tried to cut it down even more. I think we need a bit more than in your proposal, but I understand your direction.
I think it is best to have the user relate the info to his own experience. That's why in my proposal I just wrote "it like PAPI just for 'Software Counters' and with read--write access". A single sentence and whoever is listening should have a clear view on what we want to accomplish. If we directly want comments on the internals, people have to read the draft first anyway.
I added the PAPI example back.
Also. I would not cite the direct link to the drafts. People will not be able to memorize the whole url, so I think the critical info is: svn.mpi-forum.org and "Tools WG". Then, I would place a link to each draft prominently on the beginning of the page (maybe below "List of …")
Good point - I changed the slides and I will change the Wiki accordingly. Bronis:
The animated MPIT slide is good. I tweaked the animation slightly in the attached so that each examples text box appears just after the relevant animation.
That actually changed the meaning - the example had the setup phase to the left and then an example for a performance variable on the right. Control variables were not in. I changed the text to avoid this misunderstanding when Rich is presenting.
Also, I thought we agreed that we would not use hidden slides as it is confusing. In any event, I think you need some words
Those were really intended only for the Web version only.
on MPIT even with the animation. Further, the hidden MPIR texxt slide was almost identical to the unhidden one. I unhid all of the slides in the attached and merged the two MPIR text slides. A good tweak would be to animate the MPIR process figure but that would be above and beyond.
If we don't want any hidden slides - the last one seems too much. I got rid of it - people can look at the document.
Overall the current version does put us a couple slides over the request. However, it goes over due to the graphic slides, whichwill help to make the talk more interesting so I would hope that Rich would be OK with that.
We are now 1 slide over, so I hope this is OK. Kathryn:
I really like the examples and animation you added to slide 2! Now that you have that, I think you can remove some of the text from slide 3 to make it less dense without losing information, e.g. the examples of variables. I edited slide 3 so that it's somewhat less dense but still something that I think Rich can read from and get the information we want across (attached slide 3).
Slide 3 was not supposed to be shown and only intended for the web version. Since both you and Bronis seemed to not like this, I added your modified slide as an unhidden one (in which case I like the reduced text).
Also, there was a typo in slide 3 that I think you will want to fix in any case: "if the MPI implementation support this" change support to supports.
That's in there now. ________________________________________________________________________ Martin Schulz, [email protected], http://people.llnl.gov/schulzm CASC @ Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, USA