Community

The standard is developed in public at github.com/trisilva/opin under MPL 2.0. You do not need an agreement with Trisilva, or any relationship with us at all, to read it, build on it, or argue with it.

Where to raise something

A defect in the standard, meaning something that is wrong, contradictory or impossible to implement as written, goes to the repository as an issue. There is a template for it. A defect report from someone building an implementation is the most useful contribution the project receives, and it is credited as such in the changelog.

A gap, meaning something the standard should settle and does not, has its own template. So does a new market profile, which is the route for anyone who needs the standard to cover a country it does not reach yet.

A security issue goes through the security policy in the repository rather than a public issue, so it can be fixed before it is described.

A question about the platform, a commercial conversation, or anything that needs access to something not published here, goes to contact. Platform questions are not a good fit for the standard’s issue tracker, because the standard and the platform have different audiences and different rules about what can be discussed in the open.

What happens to what you raise

Every accepted change records why, against the specific defect or gap it closes. Every rejected proposal records why, in the issue. Nothing enters the standard without a written reason.

That is one procedural rule and it is doing a lot of work. A standard maintained by one organisation carries that organisation’s blind spots, and a promise to be careful is not a control. The written record is, because it lets you check the reasoning instead of trusting the maintainer. Governance sets out who decides, what a contributor can rely on, and the threshold at which editorship opens.

Discussion happens in issues

One channel, on purpose. Every question, proposal and objection lands in the issue tracker, where it is public, searchable, and attached to the change it produced.

A forum would be a second place for the same conversation, and the reasoning behind a decision would end up split across both, with the issue holding the outcome and the thread holding the argument. The argument is the part worth keeping. A reader who wants to know why the standard declares policyNumber globally unique should find that reasoning next to the change, not in a thread nobody indexed.