• Antitrust Policy Notice: Attendees are reminded to adhere to the meeting agenda and not participate in activities prohibited under antitrust and competition laws. Only members of ToIP who have signed the necessary agreements are permitted to participate in this activity beyond an observer role.
• New Members: 

• Action: Kor Dwarshuis A YouTube instructional video on how to set up a spec-up-t project from the beginning would be great.
  
• Action: We need links that are self-explanatory with version numbers in them. Because those links are what people are going to use to refer to the glossary as a whole and to specific terms. @kordwarshuis and @henkvancann could look into how the current fundamental tracking of commits could add to this concept.
  <base-url>/v1/#term:<term>
  <base-url>/latest/#term:<term>
• Workshop Spec-Up-T based glossaries; planned between Oct 8 and Oct 11, options:
  Oct 8 6PM-7PM CEST,  9AM PDT
  Oct 9 5PM-6PM CEST, 8AM PDT
  Oct 10 7PM-8PM CEST,  10AM PDT

Henk van Cann  

• ACTION: Henk and Kor need a Spec-Up-T repo at trustoverip

Request was sent to Kevin. https://github.com/trustoverip/spec-up-t target.

@drummondreed mentioned that he'd love to see a definition-only version of the search option ->

• Action: @kordwarshuis [Issue38](https://github.com/blockchainbird/spec-up-t/issues/38)
  
  

• We get stuck with the fact that if content writers use defs outside of the terms def directory of that ~, then <dd> is also created there and then my code is messed up because I do not yet know how to target the terms / defs. We suggest to limit: That is why we are just going to say →defs in one place

Rieks Joosten Henk van Cann 

• How to cope with multiple/singular versions of terms, with/without dashes. etc TEv2 tooling?
  Rieks has put a proposal in Slack in the July 1 CTWG chat. Already added as a draft to the Terminology Governance Guide. We will discuss this.
  This is a "Also Known As" challenge.