Voting meeting Attendance: Bill Stoddart Peter Knaggs Willem Botha Stephen Pelc Leon Wagner Ulrich Hoffmann Andrew Haley Gerald Wodni Bernd Paysan Anton Ertl Minutes reviewed: One minor correction Review of Basis document Major changes for the legacy proposal Reference implementations, Tests: Should they be in the document? We keep them for now, but not in the snapshot document. Discussion and votes on CfVs: 2value, fvalue: "associate" -> assigned 2value: 10/0/0 fvalue: 10/0/0 fatan2: 10/0/0 fasinh: 10/0/0 additional change to list of ambiguous conditions ftrunc: 10/0/0 put it in FLOAT EXT RfDs without CfV: Escaped strings Go to CfV Synonym Send out new Rfd and go to CfV (SP) Xchars go to CfV and include it in snapshot. BP Internationalization. Go to RfD. PK, SP Memory access wordset Go to RfD. SP/FdC IEEE FP We applaud the effort and AH, David N. Williams Fnegate-zero Is this in the right place? Maybe a negative-zero proposal, or maybe it's subsumed by IEEE FP. Go to CfV or retract. AE, Krishna Myneni Text Substitution. add escape-escaping word. AE then go to RfD and CfV. SP N>R go to CfV. SP BUFFER: go to CfV. SP Directories further discussion. AE, SP Enhanced local variables discussed earlier KEY/EKEY split events records from it vote on the rest: 9Y/0N/1A Fast-Track RfDs: Legacy proposal When the obsolete words are put in Appendix D, have that change in the snapshot 10/0/0. PK Definition Name Length. 10/0/0 PK Structures wording clarification. revised wording of CFIELD: etc. 10Y/0N/0A Not even RfD: Name token proto-RfD standard version and wordset environmental queries Matters arising: Discussion about the finalization of the snapshot. Have a pretty-final draft of the document. Electronic voting Date of next meeting: 2-day meeting before next EuroForth (Hamburg?): UH