How one can touch upon EEA paperwork
Please use the Contact Type on this web site to supply feedback on EEA Specs together with Evaluate Drafts and Editor’s Drafts, and different paperwork offered by way of this web site.
Please establish the precise model of specs and paperwork that present such info, e.g. “EthTrust Safety Ranges, Editor’s draft, 14 July 2032” or “EEA primer ‘Introduction to DAOs veersion 7′”, within the topic discipline, to ensdure the suggestions is efficeintly delivered to the related Group or employees member.
Producing useful suggestions
Useful suggestions on specs identifies
- the related half(s) of the specification. EEA specs revealed as HTML usually have part markers (“§”) which can be a hyperlink to the related part. Quoting that hyperlink is useful, along with noting the part identify and quantity.
- the issue with the present textual content, or the addition recommended. Whereas it’s useful to establish motion that will resolve the difficulty, it is very important clarify the issue because the Working Group might determine a unique decision is extra applicable.
Suggestions that implies the usage of a unique definition, a change or enchancment to grammar, a damaged hyperlink, or the like, is finest recognized as “Editorial”. Please word that the editor(s) of any specification, on the route of the related Working Group, take duty for choices on writing fashion.
Suggestions that identifies an issue with the content material itself, comparable to noting an erroroneous assertion, or a suggestion {that a} specification ought to embody content material it doesn’t at the moment tackle, is substantive and will likely be thought-about by the Working Group as a complete. The Working Group would possibly ask for additional clarification to assist it resolve the difficulty appropriately.
Good Suggestions would possibly appear like:
Part B.6 (vii) “Fascinating Fruit” of the 14 January Editor’s Draft of “Lunch concepts” <https://ift.tt/aX42dso> comprises Editorial and Substantive errors:
- Substantive: It fails to say donuts, and it contains persimmons however they don’t seem to be fascinating
- Editorial: The widespread spelling is “donuts”, not “dough-nuts”. The spelling used will confuse the worldwide viewers of this specification.
- Editorial: Using double- and triple-negatives and never writing in a approach that doesn’t use passive voice will not be conducive to simple understanding. Please contemplate rephrasing this.
Nevertheless suggestions comparable to
The specification takes the improper method, as a result of it doesn’t tackle the concepts of Shevchenko on Mishima’s later works correctly.
Is tough to course of. Whereas it means that one thing is lacking, it fails to clarify what that’s (which concepts of Shevchenko?), nor give an understanding of the way it might be mounted. Additional, it doesn’t establish in any approach which elements of the specification are problematic.
from Ethereum – My Blog https://ift.tt/9XgefQM
via IFTTT