On Mon, Sep 18, 2000 at 10:18:41AM -0600, Nathan Torkington wrote:
> Piers Cawley writes:
> > The idea here is to allow people to get ideas on the lists in a rough
> > form where they can get some initial comments (which may blow the
> > 'real' RFC out of the water...). There should be some very strict
> > rules about how soon the 'real' RFC arrives though.
>
> Why do you need to do this? Just post with a subject line like:
>
> IDEA: All Perl keywords should be in UPPER CASE
>
> and watch the shooting begin. Anything that survives this phase
> can be RFCed.
If the issue is trying to get ideas fleshed out in the next week,
adding yet more structure (e.g. proto rfc) would keep those ideas
from being posted.
The RFC format is intended to impose as little format and structure
as necessary to the author, while presenting an appropriate amount of
format and structure to the reader.
Once you've got a description, the next things to do are summarize
it in an =head1 ABSTRACT, add in some thoughts on migration issues
and implementation details, and finally, references to other RFCs,
man pages or mail messages (so people have an idea where you're
coming from). (Don't forget the title and version sections, which
should be quite easy.)
That *shouldn't* be hard. If you're getting hung up on details like
=over 4, =item, L<> and C<>, then leave them out.
Z.
