Re: CR issues disposition

* Dominique Hazaël-Massieux wrote:
>Our understanding is that you want the SpecGL to insist on the need to
>define labels going along with conformance, i.e. that a specification
>should create a well-defined label to designate an implementation
>conforming to it in one of the specified ways.

>We plan to improve this section to address the specific concern you
>raised, but want to make sure first that we understood your issue
>correctly this time :)

I think so, yes. Thanks.