templateCategory (RFC-000)
A period when the community can review the RFC (comment Docs).
Document Maintainers: Andi Gabriel Tan 2024. List of other contributors in Annex. 1.
Copyright: MIT license
Copyright © 2018-2024 Axiologic Research and Contributors.
This document is licensed under MIT license.
Abstract
The purpose of this RFC is to provide a Google Docs template that will be used to propose new RFCs.
As a reminder, “a RFC is authored by individuals or groups of engineers and computer scientists in the form of a memorandum describing methods, behaviors, research, or innovations applicable to the working of the Internet and Internet-connected systems. It is submitted either for peer review or to convey new concepts or information”[1].
To submit a new proposal, create a copy of this template (here), modify it and send a sharing link to opendsu@axiologic.net
1. RFC template main proposition
1.1. RFC Headers
1.1.2. RFC Subject
Subject of the RFC should replace “Template”
1.1.3. RFC Identifier
The correct identifier of the RFC should replace 000
1.1.4. RFC Categories
There is currently five different categories:
| Category | Description |
|---|---|
| OpenDSU SDK | JavaScript client-side standard APIs |
| Specifications | OpenDSU architecture specifications 3 subcategories(DSU, DSU Types, KeySSI) |
| Best practices | Current best practices |
| Recommendations | Recommendations for implementation |
| Rules | Rules of the OpenDSU ecosystem |
1.1.5. RFC Status
We defined a set of different status inspired from Maker Governance[2] where community voting is replaced by a period of community feedback and the review of OpenDSU governance board:
| Draft | The RFC is being drafted |
|---|---|
| Feedback | A period where community can review the RFC (comment Docs) |
| Submitted | Under review by the governing body of OpenDSU |
| Rejected | The RFC has been rejected |
| Accepted | The proposal has been accepted and will be implemented |
| Enacted | RFC has been processed and is part of the official codebase |
| Obsolete/Replaced | The RFC is not needed anymore or has been replaced |
The figures above represent the lifecycle of a RFC:
Figure 1: RFC lifecycle
Figure 2: RFC overwriting
1.1.6. RFC Contributors
Name and mail address of RFC contributors
1.1.7. RFC Table of Content
RFC must contain a table of contents
1.2. RFC Content
1.2.1. Abstract
RFCs must contain an abstract (500 words max) that describes the proposal
1.2.2. Main proposition
The main RFC proposition, you are free to use any format you like to make an adapted proposal for the selected subject.
1.2.3. References
Use references to improve and illustrate your proposal. To add a reference select the text you want to add reference for and click on Insert>Footnote.
| Current Editors | |
|---|---|
| Sînică Alboaie | sinica.alboaie@axiologic.net |
| Cosmin Ursache | cosmin@axiologic.net |
| Teodor Lupu | teodor@axiologic.net |
| Andi-Gabriel Țan | andi@axiologic.net |
| Contributors Axiologic Research | |
| Adrian Ganga | adrian@axiologic.net |
| Andi-Gabriel Țan | andi@axiologic.net |
| Cosmin Ursache | cosmin@axiologic.net |
| Daniel Sava | daniel@axiologic.net |
| Nicoleta Mihalache | nicoleta@axiologic.net |
| Valentin Gérard | valentin@axiologic.net |
| PrivateSky Contributors | |
| Alex Sofronie | alsofronie@gmail.com (DPO) |
| Cosmin Ursache | cos.ursache@gmail.com (UAIC) |
| Daniel Sava | sava.dumitru.daniel@gmail.com (HVS, AQS) |
| Daniel Visoiu | visoiu.daniel.g@gmail.com (SGiant) |
| Lenuța Alboaie | lalboaie@gmail.com (UAIC) |
| Rafael Mastaleru | rafael@rms.ro (RMS) |
| Sînică Alboaie | salboaie@gmail.com (UAIC) |
| Vlad Balmos | vlad.balmos@gmail.com (Code932) |
| PharmaLedger Contributors | |
| Ana Balan | bam@rms.ro (RMS) |
| Bogdan Mastahac | mab@rms.ro (RMS) |
| Cosmin Ursache | cos@rms.ro (RMS) |
| Rafael Mastaleru | raf@rms.ro (RMS) |
[1] RFC origin and definition - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Request_for_Comments
[2] Maker Governance Proposal System - https://vote.makerdao.com/