According to a transcript of the day's court proceedings released this evening, Donald Trump and his attorneys have not yet decided if the former president will testify at his trial.

The transcript included a private sidebar conference held this morning, during which Judge Juan Merchan asked defense lawyers about Trump's possible testimony.

"And do you have any indication whether your client is going to testify?" Merchan asked defense attorney Todd Blanche.

"No," Blanche replied.

"No determination yet?" Merchan asked.

"No," Blanche said.

The conversation happened outside of the earshot of reporters and members of the jury.

Speaking to reporters after exiting the courtroom, former President Trump was asked about today's testimony, as well as if he plans to testify during the trial.

"As you know, I'm under a gag order. So I can't really answer those very simple questions that you're asking," Trump said, referring to the order that prohibits him from making public comments about jurors, witnesses and lawyers in the case, but does not keep him from discussing the case itself.

"We'd love to not be in the gag order. I'm the Republican nominee for president. I'm leading in every poll, and I have a gag order."

Recapping his day in court, Trump said, "We had a very, I think, a very good day and important to see what's happening and you'll have to record it because I can't talk about it too much."

"We had a very good day. I think we're exposing the scam for what it is," he said.

-ABC News' Kelsey Walsh and Mike Pappano

Michael Cohen, his testimony done for the day, left the courtroom without looking at Trump.

During a bench conference, defense attorney Todd Blanche said he wants to explore with the court and the opposing counsel the admissibility of a defense expert witness before deciding whether to call him.

The judge set a conference to take place Thursday at 4 p.m. ET, after the jury is excused slightly early for the day.

Asked about Thursday's timing for the remainder of his cross-examination of Cohen, Blanche told the judge, "If I finish, it's at the end of the day."

The rest of the parties then departed the courtroom.

Michael Cohen told the jury that he wanted the Manhattan district attorney to publicly acknowledge his cooperation in this case to assist in his bid for a reduced sentence in his federal conviction on charges related to the Stormy Daniels hush money arrangement.

"You wanted the district attorney's office to publicly acknowledge that you were cooperating?" Blanche asked.

"I would say so, yes," Cohen said.

"You were trying to get your sentence ... lowered, right?" Blanche said.

"I was looking for a reduction in the home confinement portion," Cohen said.

However, the DA's office never publicly announced Cohen's cooperation.

"There was no letter or public announcement made about your cooperation," Blanche asked.

"That's correct," Cohen said.

Blanche asked Cohen if he had ever met DA Alvin Bragg in person.

"No sir," said Cohen.

Testimony subsequently concluded for the day, with Cohen's cross-examination scheduled to continue when court resumes on Thursday.

After the jury was dismissed for the day, Judge Merchan heard arguments from the two sides on whether the defense should be allowed to call an expert witness to explain to the jury how to interpret nuances in election law, particularly the phrase "for the purpose of influencing an election."

"We don't think this jury here should be evaluating a FICA violation," defense attorney Emil Bove argued.

Prosecutors objected, saying only the judge should inform the jury what the law is.

There is a "general and widely followed prohibition" against having testimony from witnesses about the law, prosecutor Matthew Colangelo argued, adding that Bove's request "flies directly in the face" of an earlier order issued by Merchan.

"The jury has to be provided instructions one way or another ... about how to apply these principles," Bove argued back.

Merchan said he would think about it over the weekend, but told the defense, "Until you hear differently from me, my ruling has not changed" that their requested testimony would not be permitted.