Am Do., 11. Aug. 2022 um 08:08 Uhr schrieb Arthur A. Gleckler <xxxxxx@speechcode.com>:
On Wed, Aug 10, 2022 at 9:47 PM Vladimir Nikishkin <xxxxxx@gmail.com> wrote:
 
Sorry, I may be wrong, but community processes (such as SRFI) are
sometimes seen as a sign of "endorsement" for something by the said
community, and I just don't see the case for endorsing INI files by Scheme
(broadly understood).

SRFIs in particular are just requests for implementation.  So John is just asking implementers to include INI parsing and generation, and providing a simple sample implementation.  SRFIs only really turn into endorsements once the implementers adopt them.

Even when implementers adopt a particular SRFI, I would be careful to deduce any kind of endorsements.  Some SRFIs are so easily adoptable that implementers include them just for the sake of shipping more SRFIs.  Others are included to make the life of users of the implementation easier.  And finally, some SRFIs that would be endorsed by an implementer are not shipped because the implementation lacks some features to support this SRFI.

As the final version of a SRFI is solely the responsibility of its author or authors and is not the result of a formal democratic process, they shouldn't be viewed as being endorsed by the community.

Of course - and here I agree with Vladimir - there is always the danger of misunderstanding.  But this has to be communicated and solved somewhere else and shouldn't prevent anyone from submitting and/or finalizing a SRFI (unless the author has come to the conclusion - maybe due to discussions with the community - that their idea is not as good as they initially thought).

Anyway, just my two cents.

Mac


[...]