To save this page you must answer this question:
What is 2 + 4?
=== PICA documents === * [http://www.communitywiki.org/en/PICA1 Pica001] -- ''text filtering/processing pipes/webservices using GET/POST'' -- our first PICA standard! Yay! * Pica002 -- ''(insert short descriptive name here)'' -- soon to be our second PICA standard! * Pica003 -- ''(insert short descriptive name here)'' -- soon to be our third PICA standard! PICA documents (the equivalent of RFC's) could be: * specifications * UserInterface recommendations * application designs * how-to's * manifestos * even artwork -- if a picture or icon captures the spirit of what we do and believe in within PICA [new:LionKimbro:2005-01-19 07:19 UTC] I'm thinking: Call the documents "POI" documents, for "Point of Interest." The acronym is pulled from my book. It is completely arbitrary, it could be anything. Just not RFC, PEP, JEP, or ISO. (They're taken.) I would say: Encourage the use of HTML, PurpleNumbers, PlainTalk, and VisualLanguage. Perhaps permit smileys where appropriate, though that's likely not our spec documents. Maybe manifestos. We leave ASCII to the IETF. They are 133t. We are not. (Yet.) For some historical perspective on all this, I recommend reading, say, [http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc6.txt RFC 6.] Un hunh. Or, say, [http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3.txt RFC 3,] which I found particularly illuminating. Mmm-Hm. Constrast [http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2223.txt RFC 2223.] This isn't to throw stones: We absolutely love the IETF. If we're lucky, PICA documents may go on to become IETF documents- like ATOM did! But I perceive the need for our own, ''independent,'' baby RFC track. [new:DavidCary:2009-04-17 14:35 UTC] If you have ideas for a new standard, but they're still rough-draft ideas not quite ready for a published numbered spec, please post them to PotentialPicaProjects .
Summary:
This change is a minor edit.
Username: