On Tue, 6 Aug 2019 at 13:54, Lynn <kja...@gmail.com> wrote: > Taking the current RFC ( > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/counterargument/deprecate_php_short_tags) as > example, how do we as reader differentiate between people's counter > arguments? When I read those points, I feel like this is something agreed > upon by the group as a whole, rather than a person and I know that not > everyone might these points as (valid) counter arguments or have different > opinions about each. > > My proposal is to add a name to either a section or argument itself, or > perhaps each person could create a page with their counter arguments, > meaning the current page becomes an index. This makes it very clear to see > who provides which arguments. >
Firstly, I would somewhat question why you need to know who holds an opinion. RFCs, and any dissenting opinions, are not manifestoes in elections, they are information presented so that you can form your own opinion. They should not be read as representative of "the group as a whole", but nor should the author be particularly important in most cases. That said, the current RFC template has an "author" field in the header, and Dan already proposed a convention of contributors "signing" dissenting opinions they agree with. The example you link to says "Author: Zeev Suraski", so I'm not sure what change you're proposing. Regards, -- Rowan Collins [IMSoP]
