►
From YouTube: Spec 3.0 meeting (March 1, 2023)
Description
A
C
A
Yeah,
so
not
I
I
actually
didn't
plan
on
on
mentioning
with
that
one
because
it's
it
hasn't
been
it's
not
being
championed
for
version
3
explicitly
like
for
xst
support,
because
it's
just
a
feature
in
the
end
most
likely
a
feature
at
least
so
it's
not
something
that's
gonna,
be
unless
someone
picks
it
up.
We
had
someone
on
slack
reached
out,
maybe
wanting
to
Champion
it
but
yeah.
So,
let's
see
what
happens,
but
for
version
3
explicitly,
there's
not
gonna,
be
any
non-json
standard
reference
support,
at
least
not
how
it
looks
like
now.
B
A
B
Not
sure
if
other
ambassadors
like
like
Jesse,
what
do
you
think
like?
Is
it
a
time
to
already
start
kinda
involving
ambassadors,
so
they
can
start
mentioning
whenever
they
are
wherever
they
are
about,
3-0,
that
it's
like
a
almost
stable
and
we're
in
few
months
want
to
release
it?
What
do
you
think.
B
C
A
A
A
D
A
So
that's
one
of
the
changes
that
that
has
been
moved,
I'm
gonna
quickly
go
over,
so
some
of
the
things
that
are
completely
done
as
far
as
I
can
tell
is
that
we
added
a
lot
of
new
metadata
to
the
fields
and
servers.
Channel
and
operation
objects
to
kind
of
uniform,
which
kind
of
metadata
you
can
Define.
So
that
seems
like
it's
completely
done
now.
A
A
A
A
And
then
we
have
let
channels
be
identified
by
an
idea
rather
than
an
address,
so
that
seems
like
it's
completely
done
as
well.
So
now,
whenever
you
define
a
channel,
it's
an
ID
and
you
use
an
address
field
instead
to
explicitly
Define.
What's
the
address
of
the
topic
or
path
or
whatever,
it
is
in
the
protocol
that
you're
using.
A
And
this
was
what
you
Lucas
talked
about,
where
you
want
to
combine
both
schema
and
schema
format
into
one.
So,
basically,
you
can
use
components
to
Define,
reusable
schemas
and
reference
them
easier.
I
couldn't
figure
out
what's
whether
it's
still
being
championed
and
who
Champions
it
and
what
is
missing.
Yes,.
B
B
So
we
need
to
wait
with
his
clear
answer
in
the
issue,
I
guess
until
next
week,
but
so
we
basically
so
maybe
I'm
wrong,
saying
we
don't
have
Champion
it's
just.
We
can
say
like
there's
at
least
two
champions,
sorry
at
least
one
Champion,
but
it's
it's
gonna
be
mature
or
me,
and
if
it's,
if
he
clarifies
next
week
that
it's
me
I'm
gonna
immediately
sit
into
it
and
and
push
it
forward.
D
A
D
D
I,
don't
think
so,
I
think
everything
is
there
we'll
see
in
the
next
month
if
something
pops
up
but
I,
think
everything
is
there
and-
and
the
only
thing
that's
concerning
me
is
request
response,
so
it's
first
of
March
and
it
still
hasn't
been
merged,
so
it's
not
Publishers
regulated
but
yeah.
That
was
the
only
issue
that
was
concerning
me.
Sorry,
if
you
already
discussed,
but
it's.
D
A
B
Was
one
stuff
that
I
call
was
missing
because
we
agreed
on
having
a
message
filter
on
reply?
He
just
needs
to
update
the
this
pack,
but
it's
nothing
that
again
has
to
go
through
conversations.
It's
just
something
that
he
he
just
needs
to
add
to
the
proposal,
but
it's
pretty
Advanced,
because
Machi
helped
with
the
parser
and
Jason
schema.
As
far
as
I
remember,.
B
A
A
B
No,
like
I
mean
so
we're
pretty
regular
with
this
proposal.
So,
as
I
said
like
he
just
needs
to
extend
the
the
markdown
document
and
like
so
it
was
me
from
looking
at
from
the
code
owner's
perspective.
It
was
me
and
Fran
having
most
conversations
there,
but
Dale
also
saw
the
proposal
and
read
it
through
a
lot,
because
he
put
a
lot
of
comments.
B
A
D
D
A
D
D
D
B
A
So
all
that's
missing
is
we
need
to
change
contribution
guideline
for
bindings
and
then
we
need
to
remove
the
spec
Json
files
from
the
bindings,
but
we
already
have
a
PR
for
that,
and
then
we
of
course
need
to
inspect
the
bindings
for
version
3
as
well.
So
that's
been
added
to
the
task
list
and
I'm
this
list
of
things
to
do
like
the
general
list
of
things.
So
true,
I'm,
probably
gonna,
add
a
bunch
of
different
things
that
we
need
to
do
before.
A
D
D
B
A
D
I
can't
remember
now,
but
yeah
that
that
makes
total
sense
actually
I
think
we
should.
We
should
introduce
it
on
version
three,
because
it's
gonna
be
a
breaking
change,
because
it's
it
changes
the
way,
the
the
object,
our
merge
and
it
makes
more
sense
to
change
it
like
you
know,
like
magic
did
so
this
this.
Actually,
this
is
coming
from.
A
D
D
D
D
If
it's
there
in
the
first
15
days
of
March,
if
not
cool,
it
will
still
make
it
to
version
three,
but
whenever
we
can
so
yeah
but
yeah
we
need
to
set.
We
need
to
to
set
the
line
right
somewhere
right
so
because
otherwise
we
will
end
up
doing
what
we've
been
doing.
The
last
years,
like
headlessly,
improving
version,
3
right
so
yeah.
D
D
A
D
D
D
D
B
B
So
deadline
was
today
or
yesterday,
but
we
had
some
items
in
the
in
the
pipeline:
the
trades
and
the
schemasing
components,
and
we
had
already
few
conversations
saying
that
in
case
of
protobuf
there
were
there's
it's
much
much
more
complicated,
but
it's
but
it's
feature
so
it
can
be
easily
like,
even
if
hiker
wants
to
Champion
it
actively.
Now,
there's
no
problem
to
release
3-0
in
June
and
3-1
in
SEPTA
in
September,
with
this
protobuf.
If
he
manages
to
do
it,
oh.
B
A
B
B
A
A
D
B
A
B
D
Here,
yeah,
of
course,
we
should
put
some
love
there,
but
to
be
honest
like
when
it
comes
to
the
discussion.
I,
don't
think
it's
important,
because
it's
right
now,
as
of
today,
it
keeps
changing.
They
keep
changing
right.
They
keep
breaking
previous
versions
so
yeah
we
should
put
more
love,
I,
definitely
agree
and
probably
to
be
the
next
big
effort,
after
version
three
that
we
with
stabilize
bindings
right.