<div dir="ltr"><div>The section that starts "Should two software projects need to release" addresses issues that are difficult to ascertain from what is written there. I'll take a stab at what it means:<br><br></div>Would bitcoin be better off if multiple applications provided their own implementations of API/RPC and corresponding application layer BIPs?<br><ul><li>While there is only one such application, its UI will be the obvious standard and confusion in usability will be avoided.</li><li>Any more than a single such application will benefit from the coordination encouraged and aided by this BIP and BIP 123.</li></ul><p>"To avoid doubt: comments and status are unrelated metrics to judge a BIP, and neither should be directly influencing the other." makes more sense to me as "To avoid doubt: comments and status are intended to be unrelated metrics. Any influence of one over the other indicates a deviation from their intended use." This can be expanded with a simple example: "In other words, a BIP having the status 'Rejected' is no reason not to write additional comments about it. Likewise, overwhelming support for a BIP in its comments section doesn't change the requirements for the 'Accepted' or 'Active' status."</p><p>Since the Bitcoin Wiki can be updated with comments from other places, I think the author of a BIP should be allowed to specify other Internet locations for comments. So "link to a Bitcoin Wiki page" could instead be "link to a comments page (strongly recommended to be in the Bitcoin Wiki)". Also, under "Will BIP comments be censored or limited to particular participants/"experts"?" You could add:</p><ul><li>The author of a BIP may indicate any commenting URL they wish. The Bitcoin Wiki is merely a recommendation, though a very strong one.<br></li></ul></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Feb 1, 2016 at 2:53 PM, Luke Dashjr via bitcoin-dev <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org" target="_blank">bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">I've completed an initial draft of a BIP that provides clarifications on the<br>
Status field for BIPs, as well as adding the ability for public comments on<br>
them, and expanding the list of allowable BIP licenses.<br>
<br>
<a href="https://github.com/luke-jr/bips/blob/bip-biprevised/bip-biprevised.mediawiki" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://github.com/luke-jr/bips/blob/bip-biprevised/bip-biprevised.mediawiki</a><br>
<br>
I plan to open discussion of making this BIP an Active status (along with BIP<br>
123) a month after initial revisions have completed. Please provide any<br>
objections now, so I can try to address them now and enable consensus to be<br>
reached.<br>
<br>
Thanks,<br>
<br>
Luke<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
bitcoin-dev mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org">bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev</a><br>
</blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><br>-- <br><div class="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr">I like to provide some work at no charge to prove my value. Do you need a techie? <br>I own <a href="http://www.litmocracy.com" target="_blank">Litmocracy</a> and <a href="http://www.memeracing.net" target="_blank">Meme Racing</a> (in alpha). <br>I'm the webmaster for <a href="http://www.voluntaryist.com" target="_blank">The Voluntaryist</a> which now accepts Bitcoin.<br>I also code for <a href="http://dollarvigilante.com/" target="_blank">The Dollar Vigilante</a>.<br>"He ought to find it more profitable to play by the rules" - Satoshi Nakamoto</div></div>
</div>