RE: spoon-discuss: RE: spoon-business: Force of law, you say?

Jorg Rathlev on 7 Jan 2002 18:48:18 -0000

[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

RE: spoon-discuss: RE: spoon-business: Force of law, you say?

To: <spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: RE: spoon-discuss: RE: spoon-business: Force of law, you say?
From: Jorg Rathlev <joerg@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2002 19:44:20 +0100
In-reply-to: <200201071336540130.00E159DB@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>

> Rule 22 was part of the initial set too.

But not rule 22/2. I think if no revision number is specified the CFJ
should be assumed to refer to the current revision.


Joerg

References:
- RE: spoon-discuss: RE: spoon-business: Force of law, you say?
  - From: Donald Whytock

Prev by Date: RE: spoon-discuss: RE: spoon-business: Force of law, you say?
Next by Date: spoon-discuss: RE: spoon-business: a reiteration of the sushi
Previous by thread: RE: spoon-discuss: RE: spoon-business: Force of law, you say?
Next by thread: RE: spoon-discuss: RE: spoon-business: Force of law, you say?
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread