Technical Team/Minutes/2015-11-10

November 10, 2015

Attendees

Proposal located at https://docs.google.com/document/d/13OknzNnY56UZhnj_VVPatirBrNze5cWXDx2fnKbBI_g/edit#heading=h.nmf14n
Reviewed latest proposal
Snippet Names
- Argument for name
  - Consistency with other SPDXItems and SPDXElements
  - Makes it easier for tools developers to common code if the model was consistent
  - It is possible that some of the snippets will be popular enough that a name makes sense
- Arguments against name
  - No strong use case where comments could be applied to solve the use cases
- It is important that it is optional
- Agreed on the call leaving name in
- Agreed it should be optional
- Updated text for the intent to include consistency as one of the reasons
Review Snippet Comments
- Agreed that it is fine - consistent with other use of comments
Discussed Olivier's comments on Snippets
- We should make sure it is clear that Snippets are optional
- The first statement in Snippets makes it sound like it is required
- Suggest updating the first statement: "Optional", "when a snippet can be cleanly identified"
- Updated first couple sentences in proposal
- Follow-up with legal team to make sure the snippet use case is a valid use case
- Use the JavaScript mash-up example - does not require interpretation
- Kate has the action from General meeting to follow-up with Oliver
- Gary will follow-up with Kate
No other snippet items were reviewed - Propose this as a candidate