|
|
@@ -16,7 +16,7 @@ The whole corpus was normalized in the same change that defined the format — t
|
|
|
|
|
|
- **A full rigid template** (one fixed section sequence per lifecycle, every RFC restructured to fit) — rejected: the big design RFCs carry eight to fifteen bespoke technical sections (package topology, wire contracts, schemas) that are load-bearing content, not drift; a rigid sequence would force destructive rewrites now and template-fighting forever.
|
|
|
- **Header-only normalization** (H1 and Status, bodies untouched) — rejected: the debt markers flagged the *body* genre split, and leaving `Context`/`Decision` beside `Problem`/`Proposal` indefinitely resolves nothing.
|
|
|
-- **No Status line** (the folder already is the status; the four newest pre-format RFCs omitted the line) — rejected in favor of keeping a self-describing file: the drift risk that motivated dropping it is neutralized by gating the line against the folder instead.
|
|
|
+- **No Status line** (the folder already is the status; the three newest pre-format RFCs (and the zh counterpart of one) omitted the line) — rejected in favor of keeping a self-describing file: the drift risk that motivated dropping it is neutralized by gating the line against the folder instead.
|
|
|
- **Dated status** (`Status: implemented (accepted YYYY-MM-DD)`) — rejected: the acceptance date is narrated history the writing rules keep out of docs; the filename carries first-proposed, git carries the rest, and the gate could check a date's format but never its truth.
|
|
|
- **A bare `# <title>` H1** — rejected: the `RFC: ` prefix is the corpus-majority form and self-describes the genre when a file is read outside its tree; the index generator strips it, so index rows are identical either way.
|
|
|
- **`## What we give up` as the implemented closer** (the README's own phrase for what an RFC records) — rejected: it names only costs, and an honest consequences section records what the trade-off bought as well.
|
Tianyi Cui