Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of bitpay.com
	designates 209.85.212.176 as permitted sender)
	client-ip=209.85.212.176; envelope-from=jgarzik@bitpay.com;
	helo=mail-wi0-f176.google.com; 
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <53C3ECD0.2000809@googlemail.com>
References: <53C3ECD0.2000809@googlemail.com>
From: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@bitpay.com>
Date: Mon, 14 Jul 2014 13:16:12 -0400
Message-ID: <CAJHLa0NHtFF58o7yG_r9gEWC=p7_E=i7Ed2C5eMBSEB078h+aQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Krzysztof Okupski <k.okupski@googlemail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Bitcoin Protocol Specification
Precedence: list

On Mon, Jul 14, 2014 at 10:44 AM, Krzysztof Okupski
<k.okupski@googlemail.com> wrote:
> I've renamed it to "Bitcoin Developer Specification" a little while ago.
> Maybe it should rather be named "Bitcoin Developer Reference"? Either
> way, creating a good description of Bitcoin is an incremental process
> and there are certainly many quirks I'm not aware of. I hope that
> together we will soon be able to fill in the missing gaps.

Firstly, it is an excellent document, and it should be useful in
educating others.

I do agree that "specification" is not a good word to use.

-- 
Jeff Garzik
Bitcoin core developer and open source evangelist
BitPay, Inc.      https://bitpay.com/