Dan Sugalski writes:
> I've been thinking since I sent my last mail on this that we might actually
> want to leave the two (PDD & RFC) separate. Keep on with the RFCs for
> 'external' things, and PDD for the actual internals implementation of things.
Ultimately, I think we're going to need at least three different
types of documentation:
* internals design documents (PDDs)
* language design documents (PLDs?)
* change requests, once we've got something to change (PCRs)
As you can see, I favour getting away from the RFC name. I wish
I'd listened to people who warned me about the confusion the name
would choose. This also means we don't have to renumber or start
counting from 1000 to differentiate the old RFCs from new ones.
Nat
