[Standards] long specs

Peter Saint-Andre stpeter at stpeter.im
Wed Feb 15 20:07:12 UTC 2012


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 2/15/12 12:48 PM, Kurt Zeilenga wrote:
> 
> On Feb 15, 2012, at 8:26 AM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
> 
>> I'd be willing to work on this, but I want to make sure that
>> people think there's value in doing so.
> 
> Personally, I not sure what I hate more, overly long documents or
> specifications unnecessarily split over multiple documents.
> 
> I don't consider XEP 45 or XEP 60 to be overly long.

Half the feedback I receive is (a) it's too hard to read a long spec.
The other half is (b) it's too hard to read multiple specs. For
XEP-0060, the feedback is heavily weighted toward (a). For XEP-0045,
it's about evenly weighted. My conclusion is that we really need to
split up XEP-0060, and that splitting XEP-0045 into user vs. admin use
cases would be helpful.

Peter

- -- 
Peter Saint-Andre
https://stpeter.im/


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (Darwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEYEARECAAYFAk88EG8ACgkQNL8k5A2w/vyaOwCfUBBv7bE94Om9ImDOoeIQmiTi
8a8AoLqKW6ul2QrXIuhMZJEWVILGjXVt
=x30E
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----



More information about the Standards mailing list