Peter Cooper Jr. on Tue, 17 Jul 2007 05:26:02 -0700 (MST)

[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: [s-d] [s-b] Proposal: Update Proposal Definition

Antonio Dolcetta wrote:
> I can't say I like this very much, it makes it too similar to programming.
> I dont think the current definition needs improvement either, it's
> general in scope, and can easily include whatever we throw at it.
> "a list of instructions" might force to use a special form, like how the
> CFJs set in question form generated endless problems and in afterthought
> were a bad idea

Well, the intent was that all along we've been treating it as a list of
instructions and not as a list of changes. For instance, a conditional
change like "If proposal X passed, then do Y" isn't really a *change*. The
"do Y" part may be a change, but the whole statement is an instruction
that needs to be followed to figure out what to do. So this is just trying
to match up our rules with what we've been doing all along.

It doesn't require the instructions to be in any particular form, just
like the existing rule doesn't require the proposal to be in any
particular form. It just creates more flexibility in what a proposal can

Peter C.
spoon-discuss mailing list