@reiver ⊼ (Charles) :batman:@reiver@mastodon.social: @silverpill Like I said, people are of course able to decide for themselves. Including disagreeing with me. ... But, I feel "building in open" should not be in the same place as specifications documenting standards.

Home | Notifications | New Note | Local | Federated | Search | Logout

Note Detail

Reply to @reiver@mastodon.social
silverpill@silverpill@mitra.social (2026-05-02 04:04:25)
@reiver I didn't know there is a debate. It seems obvious to me that these places should facilitate both practices. In case of inventing, this is the equivalent of "building in the open", that is, when you want to gather as much feedback as possible as early as possible.
---Reply---
@reiver ⊼ (Charles) :batman:@reiver@mastodon.social (2026-05-02 15:58:44)
@silverpill 

Like I said, people are of course able to decide for themselves.

Including disagreeing with me.

...

But, I feel "building in open" should not be in the same place as specifications documenting standards.


---Replies---

silverpill@silverpill@mitra.social (2026-05-02 16:48:24)
@reiver I would agree if we were talking about standards, but FEPs and RFCs are different types of documents. RFCs are literally Requests For Comments.

Organizations that publish standards (like W3C), on the other hand, ought to focus on documenting. When they do inventing, it rarely ends well.