Difference between revisions of "Mar 7th, Templates Minutes"
MulrooneyG (talk | contribs) |
MulrooneyG (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 15: | Line 15: | ||
17,25,33,37,46,75,95,102 | 17,25,33,37,46,75,95,102 | ||
IT seconded 3/0/0 | IT seconded 3/0/0 | ||
| + | |||
| + | Issue #2: Grahame moved Lloyd's comment be found non-persuasive, and that the following text will be inserted into the document per the discussion on the SPL mailing list: Under certain circumstances, when explicitly descirbed in the interface contract, applications are entitled to reject instances because unrecognized or unacceptable templates are associated with the instance, or if a template is not applied where it is expected | ||
| + | IT seconded 3/0/0 | ||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | Grahame proposed that we resolved all the remaining persuasive issues via the latest draft that he emailed out | ||
Revision as of 21:17, 7 March 2007
Attendees:
Galen Mulrooney Grahame Grieve Ian Townend Mark Shafarman
Before the meeting Grahame sent out an email requesting a vote on two prepared motions to block-approve the dispositions on the A-T and A-Q ballot responses:
- 1: to approve the dispositions for all the A-T line items, namely
40,54,58,61,63,68,73,78,79,85,87,88,98,99,101,104,105,106,108 IT seconded 3/0/0
- 2: to approve the dispositions for all the A-Q line items, namely
17,25,33,37,46,75,95,102 IT seconded 3/0/0
Issue #2: Grahame moved Lloyd's comment be found non-persuasive, and that the following text will be inserted into the document per the discussion on the SPL mailing list: Under certain circumstances, when explicitly descirbed in the interface contract, applications are entitled to reject instances because unrecognized or unacceptable templates are associated with the instance, or if a template is not applied where it is expected
IT seconded 3/0/0
Grahame proposed that we resolved all the remaining persuasive issues via the latest draft that he emailed out
