| ▲ | TheJoeMan 5 hours ago |
| That reminds me of internet RFC’s… like by the time they are formally published, no the author is not interested in your “comment”. |
|
| ▲ | alwa 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| …and, for that matter, there was an earlier draft phase where the author was R’ing For your C. And you could have jumped in then and been more-or-less welcome. |
| |
| ▲ | hunter2_ 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | Sounds like RFC ought to be the name of that draft phase, rather than a name encompassing all phases, especially not the final phase in which C's are no longer R'd. | | |
| ▲ | eesmith 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | Times changed. Historical names did not. "many of the early RFCs were actual Requests for Comments and were titled as such to avoid sounding too declarative and to encourage discussion.[8][9] The RFC leaves questions open and is written in a less formal style. This less formal style is now typical of Internet Draft documents, the precursor step before being approved as an RFC." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Request_for_Comments |
|
|
|
| ▲ | Arnt 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| I've written a few RFCs. For any RFC, there will be a "comment" after publication from someone who did not take earlier comments seriously enough to read them. |
| |
