...
| Time | Item | Who | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| 5 min | Roll call | ||
| 5 min | Review action items from last meeting |
| |
| 5 min | Discuss results of VOTE | James Turck |
|
| 5 min | AOB |
Meeting notes
Background
In discussion at the group last week, it was suggested we make a formal decision between the approach for standardising the container API. We had been looking at a couple of different APIs (OpenFin and Electron) which are broad and would potentially cover a large number of requirements outside of those needed for Symphony. It was suggested this might be too wide and that we should go back to taking a “bottoms up” approach to standardising the container application interface, i.e. looking at the de facto requirements for the Symphony application first and finding the best API(s) to satisfy those requirements.
A straw poll on the call showed majority support for this bottoms up approach, but to formalise this decision I would like a vote from the WG members.
The Vote
Proposition: Do the WG members agree to take the “bottoms up” approach (as described above) to standardise the container API?
+1 approve the proposition
-1 deny the proposition, because...
0 abstained, because...
| Rajesh Shah | HSBC | 1 |
| Johan Forsell | Factset | 1 |
| Matthew Gardener | Blackrock | 1 |
| Mark Erdtmann | Tradeweb | 1 |
| Gareth Davies | Goldman Sachs | 1 |
| Nicholas Kolba | Openfin | 1 |
| Richard Kleter | DB | 1 |
| Amit Rak | Citi | 1 |
| Tim Burcham | IHSMarkit | 1 |
| John de Murgha | Credit Suisse | 1 |
| Dov Katz | Morgan Stanley | 1 |
| James Turck | Credit Suisse | 1 |
Action items
| Rajesh Shah | HSBC | 1 |
| Johan Forsell | Factset | 1 |
| Matthew Gardener | Blackrock | 1 |
| Mark Erdtmann | Tradeweb | 1 |
| Gareth Davies | Goldman Sachs | 1 |
| Nicholas Kolba | Openfin | 1 |
| Richard Kleter | DB | 1 |
| Amit Rak | Citi | 1 |
| Tim Burcham | IHSMarkit | 1 |
| John de Murgha | Credit Suisse | 1 |
| Dov Katz | Morgan Stanley | 1 |
| James Turck | Credit Suisse | 1 |